Critic: Historians purport to discover the patterns inherent in the course of events. But historians actually impose, rather than find, such patterns by choosing what to include in and exclude from their historical narratives. Thus, properly understood, histories reveal more about the presuppositions underlying different historians' attempts to understand what happened than about what actually happened. The critic's argument depends on which one of the following assumptions? ["Which pattern a historian imposes upon events is affected by that historian's presuppositions.", 'Historians have many presuppositions in common with one another.', 'Most historians cannot become aware of the presuppositions that they bring to their narratives.', 'There is no way to determine with certainty whether a pattern described by a historian is actually present in and not merely imposed upon the events.']