Mark: To convey an understanding of past events, a historian should try to capture what it was like to experience those events. For instance, a foot soldier in the Battle of Waterloo knew through direct experience what the battle was like, and it is this kind of knowledge that the historian must capture. Carla: But how do you go about choosing whose perspective is the valid one? Is the foot soldier' s perspective more valid than that of a general? Should it be a French or an English soldier? Your approach would generate a biased version of history, and to avoid that, historians must stick to general and objective characterizations of the past. Carla does which one of the following in disputing Mark's position? ["questions Mark's presupposition that one person can understand another's feelings", "gives reason to believe that Mark's recommendation is motivated by his professional self-interest", 'questions whether Mark accurately describes the kind of historical writing he deplores', "argues that the selection involved in carrying out Mark's proposal would distort the result"]