عنوان مقاله [English]
Today, the discussion of method and methodology is one of the important measures of science in any field of science. Perhaps now, without knowledge of the method and methodology the claim of science in every discipline is questioned. In doing so, the present study criticizes three published works in the field of research method in the history, namely Research Method in Historiography by Dr. Jahangir Ghaem Maghami, An Introduction to Research Method in the History by Dr. Alireza Mollaiy Tavani and Method of Research in History by Dr. Hassan Hazratiand, evaluating the method and methodology and its relation with thinking in the history. This critique reveals the implications of adopting a positivist approach in the history. The adoption of the methodological patterns of natural sciences in history, weakening the position of criticism, Undermining the position of thought in history, ignoring the role of the historian as at least part of the process of producing history, etc. are the consequences of adopting a positivist approach in history. Accordingly, it is the current research strategy that arrangements are to be considered by that, thinking in history becomes the dominant position. The present article aims to establish a distinct relation between history and thought, and there is a definition and interpretation of history and historical methodology, advocating strengthening thinking.