In Defense of Thought :Critical review of three works in thefieldof method of research in history

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 is questionedthe claim of sciencein every discipline.  Meanwhilethe present study criticizes three published works in the field of research method in the historynamelyresearch Method in Historiography by Dr. Jahangir GhaemMaghami, an introduction to research method in the history by Dr. AlirezaMollaiyTavani and Method of Research in History by Dr. Hassan Hazratiand  it has evaluated method and methodology and its relation with thinking in the history. This critique reveals the implications of adopting a positivist approach in the history.Adoption of the methodologicalpatterns of natural sciences in history,Weakening the position of criticism, Undermining the position of thought in history, ignore the role of the historian as at least part of the process of producing history, and ... is the consequences of adopting a positivist approach in history. Accordingly, it is the current research strategy that  arrangements are to be consideredby that, thinking in history becomes the dominant position.The present article problem is to establish a distinct relation between history and thought and in this regard, there is a definition and interpretation of history and historical methodology that advocates for strengthening thinking.