Abstract

Today the greatest role in historical processes is played by sources and their data, and also at the logical scientific conclusions which based on drawn sources with the corresponding purposes. This article shows the basic points of view in the field of methodology of historical science and work with sources in historical researches and on the basis of interpretation of the facts logically suitable opinions on the given question are stated.

Introduction

Sources are subjective in a sense, and the ability to fully describe historical processes is limited in some sense or, in other words, the ability of the historian in the research process to depend directly on the information contained in the sources, arising from a historical and objective point of view. In this case, a scientifically logical approach is essential.

Material resources created at different periods of history also have a certain degree of subjective ownership, both geographically and periodically, according to the historical period and the general state of historical processes. A specific material source provides an overview, commentary, or description of a particular situation and part of the process. It allows you to visualize a particular part of the general historical process, for example, the architecture, or a piece of ceramic piece or piece of social life. At the same time, general historical processes may be overlooked in some sense or, in other words, the same source may not give the impression that they are fully aware of it.

For a historian, it is important for the historian to broaden his knowledge through logical reflection on the historical processes, economic processes, spiritual development and cultural status of society.

Theo retical background

There are such opinions about the method and methodology of historical research: - “Public life is the main object of scientific study of social historical processes. All human events, together with their general and inherent internal laws, together with their external factors, constitute the history of man and his world history. After all, humanity creates its own history. So people are not just the authors of history, but they are also the performers of history. But the question of knowing the history of mankind is never unified

It is important to relate historical events to different peoples, countries and countries. It is also the diversity of history. No historical event is repeated exactly. But all historical events are linked by their inner unity. This inner unity is not visible. Without understanding the internal cohesion of this system of historical events, one cannot approach historical research.” [3, P. 19-22]

Author of a number of scientific publications in the field of methodology of historical science, I. Kovalchenko emphasizes that sources and their arguments are divided into three categories, namely true historical facts, historical sources and scientific and historical evidence, and that historians must distinguish evidence from this category.

Also, according to experts in this field, fact is an objective idea, reflected in the mind. Historical facts are not similar to events, but comparisons can lead to subjectivity. [5, P. 106-138.]

Main part

The basis of any research is that the primary source should be the history itself, that is, the time when these historical processes took place, the historical conditions that created the processes, and the regional factors. In this regard, the political and economic situation of the historical period and the region, the main aspects of the spiritual life of the society are important. It is important for the historian to have a deep knowledge of the historical processes of the time, to attract and use the sources and evidence of that period, and to think logically about them.

The scientific approach that historians identify when describing and identifying common historical processes is not only the facts itself, but also the logical consistency of historical processes, which is an important factor in making the overall scientific conclusions logical. [4, P. 55-68]

Although sources play a major role in the study of historical processes, it is desirable to select scientific conclusions based on the general state of the historical processes, rather than just the information contained in them. As stated in the scientific literature, there is no history without facts or evidence. The historian selects written and material sources based on the content and essence of the research, selects them, ie facts and arguments, "revives" them by interpreting them, introduces them into his scientific system through his imagination, descriptions and interpretations, and can break part of the process. First, the analysis of historical sources provides information, facts and descriptions of historical processes, and secondly, the uncertainty between the written sources, the comparisons of written and material sources, and the inability to fill in gaps and abstractions in the description and analysis of historical processes.[1, P. 153-154]

It is true, however, that some historians have suggested that such a study is subjective. However, the prevailing essence is not that the historian submits his thoughts and conclusions to the historical process or to its essence, but rather to reason logically based on historical processes and events from historical sources, and to make scientific conclusions based on sources. [2, P. 163-164]

What does this mean?

It is worth noting the following points:

First, it is evident from historical studies that not all sources have been able to fully capture the details of historical processes.

Second, it is neither logical nor practically possible to have material resources or written sources that reflect all the characteristics of historical processes, events, events and reflect their essence.

Third, in all cases of creation of any written and material sources, subjectivity is at the forefront, and it is a matter of fact (except for official documents and legal texts) that the whole, objective, and objective coverage of historical processes is.Fourth, in the process of examining the historical process through the information, facts and facts presented in the sources, there is a discontinuity and at the same time uncertainty in the description of the historical process, as some aspects of the issue are ignored or inconsistent with the author's mind and worldview. This is another reason why the sources cannot be fully described in historical terms.

Discussions

Based on the foregoing, we can further reinforce the points we have already made in the process of involving the sources and the data and evidence in the research process. That is, it is advisable to

take into account their specific subjective features when using written and material resources in historical research. At the same time, historically theorists say that it is important to logically shape, model, and systematize the historical processes themselves, using the methods of the sources in the research so far.

Thus, a logical approach to historical sources and evidence interpretation in the course of historical research is, first, that all sources do not contain all the details of historical processes; it is neither logical nor practicable that written sources exist, and, thirdly, all written and material sources. It also shows that subjectivity is still subjective, and, fourthly, the inaccuracy of historical processes through the information, facts and facts cited in the sources.

Conclusion

Most importantly, a logical approach to historical sources and evidence interpretation can fill gaps in the details of historical processes that are not reflected in the sources and provide a complete and comprehensive overview of the historical process. The most difficult process is to refer to the history or the historical process itself as the primary source.

The professionalism of the historian in the research process, the profound understanding of the historical processes, the ability to use the facts and the facts logically and at the same time, to adhere to the scientific and objectivity of the conclusions.

References

1. Alimova, DA, Ilhomov, Z.A. (2018). The methodology of historical science. Tashkent. National Society of Philosophers of Uzbekistan.
2. Alimova, DA, Ilhomov, Z.A. (2019). The methodology of historical science. Tashkent. Navruz.
3. Ilhomov, Z.A. (2018). The theory of logic in the interpretation of evidence. History in Uzbekistan: problems and perspectives of development. Tashkent. "Academician".
4. Ilhomov, Z.A. (2016) The theory of logic and interpretation of facts in historical knowledge IV International scientific and practical conference.
5. Kovalchenko, I.D. (1987). Methods of historical research. Moskva, “Science.”