Question

Question 1 of 10
2 Points
Why should historians make sound generalizations rather than
oversimplifications when analyzing sources?
A. Sound generalizations make claims of fact rather than claims of
value.
B. Sound generalizations can accommodate a variety of complex
sources
C. Sound generalizations are very convincing as a form of rhetoric.
D. Sound generalizations allow historians to ignore contradictory
evidence.

Answer 1

Answer: B. Sound generalizations can accommodate a variety of complex

sources

Answer 2

B. Sound generalizations can accommodate a variety of complex

sources

Why are the rest considered invalid?

• For point (A)Sound generalization make claims of fact rather then value isn't true as sound generalizations aren't necessarily made over facts in the first place.
• For point (C), sound generalizations aren't necessarily rhetoric either.
• For point (D), Sound generalizations dont have any link to ignore contradictory evidence either.

What is sound generalizations?

• Generalization is the process of extending a specific instance to a wider or universal set.
• explanatory context.
• To generalize a concept is to identify how it relates more broadly with less specific criteria or constraints.

For further information on sound generalizations:

https://brainly.com/question/13491567

#SPJ2