英语翻译Similarly,a third group of historians might maintain tha

英语翻译
Similarly,a third group of historians might maintain that the various items on the list should not be given equal weight,that one of the reasons listed,say bankers’ loans,was most important and that the others seemed to be significant only because of the overwhelming power of the bankers to influence American policy.The theory here would be that economic matters are the key to human motivation and that a small number of wealthy bankers have a disproportionate ability to influence government.Again,these historians will disagree with the first two groups,and they will find relevant certain facts that the others overlook --- for example,bankers’ opinions,the lobbying activities of bankers,financial and political connections between bankers and politicians,and the like.
In the examples given,historians disagree because they begin from different premises; in other words,they have different theories of human motivation.But there is still another realm of disagreement which stems from something rather different.Historians sometimes disagree because they are not really discussing the same thing.Often they are merely considering different levels of cause and effect.A few examples will illustrate this point.
The simplest level of analysis of cause and effect is to recognize what may be called proximate cause.“ I was late far class,” you explain,“ because I overslept,” Or,to use a historical example,“ the Civil War began because South Carolina shore batteries opened fire on the federal garrison at Fort Sumter on April 12,1861.” Neither statement can be faulted on the grounds that it is inaccurate; at the same time,however,neither is sufficient as an explanation of the event being considered.The next question is obvious:Why did you oversleep,or why did relations between one state and the federal government reached the point where differences had to be settled by war?To this you may answer that you were out very late the night before at a party,and the historian may respond that the authorities in South Carolina concluded that the election of Abraham Lincoln and his subsequent actions in threatening to supply the federal garrison at Fort Sumter were a menace to the well-being of South Carolina.

同样,第三个小组史学家也许主张,各种各样的项目在名单不应该被给相等的重量,一个原因列出了,言银行家的贷款,最重要并且其他似乎是重大的只由于银行家的巨大力量影响美国政策.理论这里会是,经济方面是钥匙对人的刺激并且很小数量富裕的银行家有不均衡的能力影响政府.再,这些史学家将不同意第一二个小组,并且他们将发现其他俯视--- 例如,银行家的观点、银行家游说的活动,财政和政治连接在银行家之间和政客,和等等的相关的某些事实.在例子给出,史学家不同意因为他们开始从不同的前提; 换句话说,他们有人的刺激的不同的理论.但仍然有源于相当不同事分歧的其它领土.史学家有时不同意因为他们真正地不谈论同样事.经常他们仅仅考虑起因和作用的不同的水平.几个例子将说明这点.对起因和作用的分析的最简单的水平是认可什么可以叫做靠近起因"我是晚远的类," "因为我睡过头了," 或,使用一个历史例子,"内战开始了因为南卡罗林纳岸电池开火在联邦驻军在堡垒Sumter 在1861 年4月12 日." 声明无法被非难根据它是不精确的; 同时,然而,两者都不是充足的因为事件的解释被考虑.下个问题是显然的:为什么您睡过头了,或为什么联系在一个之间陈述了并且联邦政府到达了区别必须由战争安定的点?对这您可以回答说您以前是在非常晚之外夜在党,并且史学家也许反应当局在南卡罗林纳认为,Abraham Lincoln 的竞选和他的随后行动在威胁供应联邦驻军在堡垒Sumter 是威胁对南卡罗林纳福利.