Quote:
Originally posted by alex_revell@Jul 2 2004, 01:33 PM
[b] Someone stated that they didn't think the opinions of people who were in 60 at the time carries any weight, that it's just hearsay. Maybe I'm a funny kind of a bloke but I think that the these people's opinions carry an awful lot of weight as evidence. The fact that these opinins were held during B's time with 60, and after, gives them credence in my eyes. And don't forget these opinions were held throughout the RFC. The views of B's contemporaries can't just be shrugged aside.
|
The opinions of Bishop’s contemporaries carry weight to prove that they had those opinions. A decision maker can draw conclusions from those opinions and the fact that the opinion was widely held. In that sense, those views are not shrugged aside. Life would be intolerable if the proof of facts was determined by the opinions of others, even it those others are contemporaries. Proof by popularity. So many of the stories about WW 1 aviation, particularly those about the aces, derive from the opinions of others and are now accepted as fact because they are repeated as if they were fact. How Bishop was able to have so many claims confirmed where others could not and how he came to be awarded the highest Empire award for valour, his claim apparently escaping being subjected to the rules and standards of proof applied to verification of the deeds of others is, in my mind, of greater significance than whether he exaggerated or outright lied. Your man’s unpublished autobiography will be even more facinating if he explored that issue.