Historians have long struggled with the questions of historical relativism, objectivity, and standards of proof and evidence. Intellectual historian Alan Spitzer focuses on the contradiction between theory and practice by presenting case studies of four politically charged debates about the past: the response to the report of the commission chaired by John Dewey that evaluated the accusations made against Leon Trotsky in the Moscow Purge Trials of 1937, the Dreyfus Affair in turn-of-the-century France, the allegations about the extent and meaning of literary critic Paul de Man's complicity with the German occupation forces in wartime Belgium, and Ronald Reagan's justification for his 1987 visit to a German cemetery where Nazi SS officers are buried. Spitzer's argument centers on the ways in which the authority of 'objective' criteria for historical judgment are introduced in politicized disputes about the past, regardless of the theoretical qualification or repudiation of such standards. The higher the political stakes, the more likely the antagonists are to appeal to generally warranted standards of relevant evidence and rational inference. Spitzer's commentary speaks to issues that transcend the specific content of the four cases he discusses.
This phrase, heard countless times every day in American courtrooms across the country, sets forth the burden of proof placed upon the prosecution in a criminal trial. Yet this cherished principle is not mentioned in the Constitution, nor is it defined by any laws. What, then, does “beyond a reasonable doubt” really mean, and how should it be interpreted and applied? In Beyond a Reasonable Doubt more than 80 distinguished contributors reflect on what this standard really means and how it is applied. Brilliantly dissecting its meaning from every angle, attorneys, judges, novelists, journalists, religious leaders and convicted felons shine a light on the most compelling standard in our legal system.
In showing why the Carbonari conspiracy developed and how it was handled, the author has illuminated the workings of the political system of the Restoration--the structure and organization of its administration and political police and the operation of political justice in its courts.
Alan Spitzer approaches the history of the French Restoration by examining the experience of a particular age group born between 1792 and 1803: the generation of 1820. A predominantly male, middle-class, educated minority of this group was perceived as representing all that was most promising and specifically youthful in the period. Their response to the pressures of transition was expressed in the fractious behavior of the youth of the schools,'' and in voluntary associations, masonic lodges, conspiratorial cells, and influential journals, which depended on a dense network of personal relationships. Professor Spitzer portrays these connections in a set of sociograms using new techniques for the visual representation of social networks. Originally published in 1987. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.
Historians have long struggled with the questions of historical relativism, objectivity, and standards of proof and evidence. Intellectual historian Alan Spitzer focuses on the contradiction between theory and practice by presenting case studies of four politically charged debates about the past: the response to the report of the commission chaired by John Dewey that evaluated the accusations made against Leon Trotsky in the Moscow Purge Trials of 1937, the Dreyfus Affair in turn-of-the-century France, the allegations about the extent and meaning of literary critic Paul de Man's complicity with the German occupation forces in wartime Belgium, and Ronald Reagan's justification for his 1987 visit to a German cemetery where Nazi SS officers are buried. Spitzer's argument centers on the ways in which the authority of 'objective' criteria for historical judgment are introduced in politicized disputes about the past, regardless of the theoretical qualification or repudiation of such standards. The higher the political stakes, the more likely the antagonists are to appeal to generally warranted standards of relevant evidence and rational inference. Spitzer's commentary speaks to issues that transcend the specific content of the four cases he discusses.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.