From the Times Literary Supplement: “Ronald Fritze, a historian and dean at Athens State University in Alabama, is concerned about, and clearly fascinated by, the pseudo-histories and pseudo-sciences . . .” The article goes on to describe his work, and the writer of the article appears to have trouble with discernible truth and passionate lies.
“But, how do we reckon with the fact that pseudo-historians also insist on their stories’ truth? Through evidence and “objective” empirical methods, Fritze tells us, again without raising any questions of method and evidence. While objective historians look at all the facts, guarding themselves against presuppositions, pseudo-historians choose only those that support their case.”
Because insisting on the truth of something does not make it true. Imagine that.
Interesting review. The reviewer recognizes the value of much of what Fritze writes, but cannot overcome his own prejudice against southern Christians and people who believe in moral absolutes.