Do historians and human scientists have an ethical obligation to follow the directive: “Do

not ignore contradictory evidence”?

​ In the due process of human events, especially those evaluating our actions as a species,

an argument always arises over the “truth:” What defines it? Who creates and certifies it? When

does something “become” true? Such abstractions are the responsibility of the historian and

social scientist, the arbiters of our past and present respectively; through their lenses, we gain the

most objective evaluation and emulation of reality. But holding these professionals to proper

standards comes with a paradigm surrounding the efficacy of contradiction: what it is, and

examined here, when to disregard it, if at all. To maintain a complete adherence to fact, as they

must serve, historians and human scientists must follow the directive “Do not ignore

contradictory evidence,” as doing otherwise would be a disservice to themselves, their craft, and

all humankind; however, many struggle to uphold that standard.

​ The most glaring appearance of contradictory evidence comes in history. History has

experienced contradiction since its inception, with the first example noted as early as 1274 B.C.;

written documentation of the Battle of Kadesh, a 13th-century B.C. campaign by pharaoh

Ramses II against the Hittites in Syria, provides no clear answer about the victor, with Egyptian

records like the Poem of Pentaur claiming it was decisively for Ramses II and Hittite king

Muwatalli II stating it was either a stalemate or victory (Schulman, 1962). Though this is a

millennia-old example, it proves that historians have contended with contradiction for as long as

the field has existed.

​ Within the modern fold comes contradiction and the dubious origins behind it. In

American history education, one institution handles things in a method unique as it is

antithetical: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, colloquially known as the

Mormons. According to legend, Joseph Smith found golden plates in the hills of upstate New

York, but he never told the story the same way twice (Park, 2023). After transcribing it via “seer

stones” in a hat (Journal, 9–11 Nov. 1835 (later copied into JS History, 1834–1836, 121–122))

Smith claimed to have a new gospel depicting things unknown in North America before the

Columbian Exchange (Wissler, 1992). Despite these issues, Mormons view this text, the Book of

Mormon, as history.

​ In the late 20th century, a greater push emerged within the church to prove the Book of

Mormon as a historical fact. Despite the statements posited in the Book of Mormon and defended

by church historians such as John L. Sorenson, Rod Meldrum, and Steven E. Jones, the

overwhelming scientific consensus is that Indigenous Americans migrated across the Bering

Strait landbridge some twenty to thirty thousand years ago with no Middle Eastern connection

(Perego, 2011).

Church academics have responded to this evidence by reconciling its interpretation. Like

the Bible and Torah before it, in recent years, there has been a substantial effort within Church

historian circles to view the Book of Mormon less as an objective retelling of events and more so

as a matter of faith (Sweat & Alford, 2020). These statements oppose Joseph Smith’s claims on

the Book of Mormon, who called it “the most correct book [ever written]...” (Millet, 2007) and

an account of actual ancient American civilizations, a belief still held by the church’s executive

leaders (Nelson, 1999).

To further illustrate how contradictory evidence is handled in historical interpretation, I

interviewed a practicing member of the LDS Church, referred to as P.G. When asked about the

historical accuracy of the Book of Mormon, he claimed it was history but could not provide
 3

examples. He also explained that Native Americans had dark skin because they intermarried with

the Lamanites, a dark-skinned tribe of non-believers. He said not all indigenous Americans were

Israelites; rather, they came from interbreeding with Middle Eastern conquerors. From this

interview, it appears that for some believers, faith-based interpretation can take precedence over

historical evidence when contradictions arise. This response exemplifies the conflict historians

and human scientists face: when evidence contradicts deeply held beliefs, should they prioritize

fact or accommodate alternative interpretations?

When evaluating contradictions, they span beyond history. The definition of a “social

scientist” must be applied liberally for this example, to that of the lawmaker. Still, it paints a

grim picture of why social scientists—specifically lawmakers in my state—behave the way they

do toward certain people groups despite overwhelming evidence that their behavior is immensely

prejudiced and rooted in malice. What my state has given me detracts in equal measure; all I’ve

seen from my childhood here is that hospitality is literally skin deep. The 114th General

Assembly, sworn in less than two months ago at the time of writing, has passed little legislation

to remedy the state’s infrastructure, welfare dependency, or opioid crisis. Rather they have spent

it passing legislation focusing on petty non-issues rooted in maliciously-distributed

contradictions.

The most apparent contradiction that the legislature has adopted is its stance on

immigration. My state’s anti-immigrant stance is no surprise to anyone familiar with American

politics. However, the legislature’s approach to the matter has been prolific as it is problematic;

as of 18 February 2025, seventy-seven immigration bills have been introduced: For example, all

immigrants must carry a card a police officer can request at any time (Cepicky, Hensley 2025),
 4

illegal aliens cannot be plaintiffs in court or do business (Rudd, Bowling 2025), and hospitals

must ask citizenship status before treatment (Zachary, Lowe 2025).

My state legislature believes immigrants are dangerous despite evidence saying

otherwise. In October 2024, the American Immigration Council showed that crime falls with

increased immigration (AIC fact sheet, 2024). Additionally, drunk driving, drug arrests, and

murders have decreased with heightened immigration (AIC fact sheet, 2024).

Why, then, do so many lawmakers hone in on immigrants as the problem despite this

evidence? Like the Mormons before them, these officials focus greatly on the ideology

surrounding their beliefs rather than any justification to support them. Contradictions become

suggestions to acknowledge in passing and then dismiss, even though the instruction to confront

them directly says otherwise. No more is this apparent in how my state’s legislature treats

LGBTQ+ people, specifically transgender women.

In 2021, Governor Bill Lee signed House Bill 1182, prohibiting people of a gender

identity outside the one assigned at birth from using a different restroom. This bill is rooted in

the treatment of transgender women as sexual predators. It has been a widely-held belief in the

United States that transgender women are deviants who enter female restrooms to assault

cisgender women. The reality is the opposite: Transgender people are four times more likely than

cisgender people to be victims of violent crime (Dowd, 2021).

Furthermore, Senate Bill 228 and House Bill 3 in 2021 and 2022 banned transgender girls

from women’s sports despite evidence suggesting feminizing hormone replacement therapy can

level the proverbial playing field substantially (Roberts et. al, 2021). Furthermore, these laws

open the door to “transvestigation” laws: Women with XXY chromosomes and more muscle

mass compared to their peers may be banned from sports because their school deemed them too
 5

masculine for play. However, the lawmaker, the most important social scientist in my nation,

refuses to acknowledge these issues and hone in on how to make life as difficult as possible for a

group deemed “dangerous” despite everything saying otherwise. That is what makes ignoring

contradiction unethical.

In conclusion, historians and human scientists have a moral and professional obligation to

follow the directive: “Do not ignore contradictory evidence.” Our world is rife with

contradictions; they muddy the waters when determining what is right and fair matters most. It is

a harsh, dissonant reality we must contend with that contradiction has become the ideology of the

powerful and has leached into the minds of the masses. One can find them in all aspects of life,

but what matters is pulling them from our soil by the roots and holding those who determine

what is truth and lies accountable. If our world can follow the simple directive to seek the truth

while disregarding the ideologies that hold us in a vice, perhaps we stand a chance at making our

world better for all, every day, one truth at a time.

Works Cited​

Schulman, Alan. The N’rn at the Battle of Kadesh. Journal of the American Research Center in

Egypt, vol. 1, no. 1, 1962, pp. 47-52. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/40000857.

Park, Benjamin. “Joseph Smith Discovers the Golden Plates:” Current Events in Historical

Perspective, Ohio State University,

https://origins.osu.edu/read/joseph-smith-discovers-gold-plates.

Wissler, Clark. The American Indian. Quoted in B. H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon,

2nd ed., Signature Books, 1992, p. 99.

The Gold Plates and the Translation of the Book of Mormon. The Joseph Smith Papers, The

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/site/the-gold-plates-and-the-translation-of-the-book-of-morm

on.

Perego, Uga. “The Book of Mormon, the Origin of Native Americans, and a Maternally Inherited

DNA Standpoint.” Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University,

https://rsc.byu.edu/no-weapon-shall-prosper/book-mormon-origin-native-americans-maternally-i

nherited-dna-standpoint.

Sweat, Anthony and Alford, Kenneth. “A Method for Evaluating Latter-day Saint History.”

Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, vol. 21, no. 3, 2020,

https://rsc.byu.edu/vol-21-no-3-2020/method-evaluating-latter-day-saint-history.​

Millet, Robert. “The Most Correct Book: Joseph Smith’s Appraisal.” Religious Studies Center,

Brigham Young University,

https://rsc.byu.edu/living-book-mormon-abiding-its-precepts/most-correct-book-joseph-smiths-a

ppraisal.​

The Book of Mormon. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,

https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng.​

Bacallao, Marianna. “Tennessee's New Anti-Immigration Measures Signal the New Normal for
 8

Republican States.” NPR, 2 Feb. 2025,

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/02/nx-s1-5280431/tennessees-new-anti-immigration-measures-sign

al-the-new-normal-for-republican-states.​

Bills by Subject: Immigration. Tennessee General Assembly, 114th General Assembly,

https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/subjectindex/BillsBySubject.aspx?Primarysubject=2368&GA=1

14.

American Immigration Council. Debunking the Myth of Immigrants and Crime. October 2024,

www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/debunking_the_myth_of_immi

grants_and_crime.pdf.

Dastagir, Alia. “Transgender Bathroom Bills: Discrimination?” USA Today, 28 Apr. 2016,

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/04/28/transgender-bathroom-bills-discriminat

ion/32594395/.

Flores, Andrew R., et al. “Transgender People Over Four Times More Likely Than Cisgender

People to Be Victims of Violent Crime.” Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, 23 Mar. 2021,

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/.

Roberts, Timothy A., et al. “Effect of Gender Affirming Hormones on Athletic Performance in

Transwomen and Transmen: Implications for Sporting Organisations and Legislators.” British
 9

Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 55, no. 11, 2021, pp. 577–583,

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577.