{{page>Templates:Secularization}} //**"**// History is an account, mostly false, of events, mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers, mostly knaves, and soldiers, mostly fools. //**"**// ~Ambrose Bierce {{:wiki:rationalwiki_logo.png?nolink&50|}} The [[https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Essay:I_thought_this_was_supposed_to_be_RATIONALWiki|"rational"]] people over at [[:RationalWiki]] have an article on [[https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/History|History]]. History refers to the past or at least the study of the past. While perhaps interesting to those with an innate interest in how the modern day came to be, it is not particularly interesting when establishing a consensus on how the modern day //should// be. When reading this page, keep in mind that this is my primary interest: Finding out what is best for humanity, then finding a way to get there. Everything else is irrelevant.((Irrelevant **to me**, anyway. I am not saying that someone else may feel different about it.))\\ {{page>Templates:Factuality}} ====== Meaning of History to me ====== {{ ::maya-hieroglyphic-script.jpg}} ---- The Mayans spent their time pulling strings of thorns through people's tongues(([[CGP Grey]], in [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcc_KAhwpa0&t=35s|2012 Didn't Happen]])), I'm sure learning about how to appease the holy Coyopa((Name of god chosen at random. I originally chose Vishnu but worried this may lead to outcry because Vishnu isn't Mayan, and that because of this narrative inconsistency, the entire point of history not telling us much new would become invalid.)) to prevent divine intervention by orbital obliberation will prove mighty useful to you one day. Being a [[Humanism|humanist]], I care about human lives. I care about quality of life, health, access to education, equality before the law, the fight against discrimination of all kinds, I care about families, friendships, couples and marriages, the good times and the hardships we persevered through... I care about humans and that they get as good a life as they can possibly have. This means abandoning all preconceptions about what is considered "good" or "bad", it means that nothing is holy or safe from scrutiny, but it also means that I am focused on the present. The past is history and done and dealt with. What matters is the situation we have at hand right now - what actions we can take to improve the life of //everyone, today//. For example, the tragedy that unfolded in World War 2 is terrible - humans were hurt, families severed, hopes and dreams crushed. This //is// terrible and I //do// care about it in THAT sense. However, beyond the humanistic perspective of "this was terrible and my deepest condolences", this is //not// relevant to me. Everyone today deserves the best life they can possibly have, what does knowing about WW2 change about this? It may sound aggressive at first, but it will make sense later: I don't care about World War 2. I don't care about Israel and Palestine. I don't care about Russia and Ukraine. I care about the fact that guns are being used to hurt and kill, to sever, cripple and tear apart, affecting humans //right now//. I don't care what the IDF has to say or what Hamas wants((No politically motivated ulterior motive justifies an invasion if both sides could live perfectly peacefully just by leaving each other alone.)), just put your guns down. Who cares about WW2 now? We have problems at our hand //right now// and I don't need no history to know right from wrong. ====== But history is important! ====== It has happened to me several times in the past that, during conversations about history I found myself under attack for not caring about history too much. One argumentation is that you need to learn from history to avoid making the same mistakes. And while, sure, the past can be a good tool for getting a feel for mistakes that have already been made, it is not a necessity. It doesn't take a war to know a war. War is bad, whether it happened before or not. Antisemitism is bad, it didn't need World War 2 to find that out. In the same vein, climate change inaction is bad, we already know this even without already having ruined a planet.\\ **Moral imperatives can be deduced from the status quo, history plays no role in this.** ===== Some context on 'Mistakes' ===== {{ ::ballistic_missile_10142002.png |}} ---- This Nuclear Intercontinental Ballistic Missile is going to be a mighty fine learning experience for history scholars of future generations - for that they don't repeat our mistakes, assuming they still can. Until then, nothing needs to be done.((This presents two arguments. 1: Some mistakes should never be done, and extinction through self-annhilitation in nuclear armageddon is not exactly a thing that appears anywhere in our history books. So, on mistakes like these, history is not helpful. Depending on how or if at all you agree to this, 2 may or may not apply. 2: Although, on a smaller scale there still are mistakes that shouldn't be done. Not civilization ending mistakes, but still. But looking at climate change or nuclear weapons... are we learning from them?)) "We need history to not repeat our mistakes." cry the critics. Yes, if only the people in 1933 had some history to draw from to make their decisions, because then [[World War 2]] would never have happened. If we had tales of a previous, intelligent civilization on earth going extinct due to [[climate change]], would that suddenly make people care about it?((If yes then why does it take someone else to make a mistake before we before you can stop making that same mistake ourselves? If not, then apparently we are **not** learning from history.)) No matter what you answer, yes or no, it shines light on some very fundamental flaws in society which are //not// addressed by learning about history.\\ The irony is that we do in fact have tales of changing climates leading to the downfall of civilizations. The Mayan decline was through ecological, climate factors.\\ \\ Just keep in mind that, yes, [[antisemitism]] has already happened. Homophobia has already happened. Slavery has already happened. War and terror are deeply rooted in human history. The modern times revival of these old things in addition to the current rise of antisemitism (the 2023 Israel war on Gaza is happening as I am writing this), the LGBTQIA+ moral panic triggered by conservative pundits etc., history has little to say about these things that I couldn't already deduce from just the application of ethics. History may be able to give //context// and that is good, but in terms of "how much can I learn from history that allows me to make better decisions //today//?", history is, unfortunately, not the gold mine it is made out to be, and looking at the world out there, we are definitely //not// learning from it. Of course we're not. For example, the mistake of being politically inactive. Only ever casting a vote every four years or so to get a say on who gets to take a turn is certainly not being 'politically active'. "The politicians are breaking their campaign promises", but nobody ever thinks about doing something about it. Political inaction of the people is what enables rampant corruption in rich countries like Germany. If corruption actually sufficiently affected re-election rates or caused massive protests and strikes, things would change very rapidly. It can't ever be fully eliminated, but it could be made politically insignificant. If climate change inaction lead to horrible re-election rates or mass strikes, we would be the first nation to fully transition to renewables. History shows us how this mistake was made time and time again, but nobody is learning. Where the hell is the learning!?? Nobody is not reapeating other people's mistakes. There's war, discrimination, bullying, inflated body images, marginalization, but certainly every individual thinks they're not part of it somehow. "I definitely do not marginalize people! I would know if I did, but because I am a good person (obviously) I know that I am not."((Just because someone is not marginalizing jews doesn't make them any better //today// than those who marginalized jews in //their// time, if they are marginalizing other people (not jews, but still marginalizing) in //our// time. Or just spread hate/spite in general, through whatever way possible.)) ===== But isn't everything history? ===== Everything we see and smell and know and feel is part of a long, sliding scale of history that extends ever-forward in lockstep with time that moves ahead at the same pace itself. As such, every piece of information we know is based on history. When I say that war is bad, I rely on the experiences from the past where I have felt suffering, [[Utilitarianism|declare suffering as bad]]((Because it is an [[axiom]] in my moral framework.)), go on to claim that war has a lot of suffering and therefore that it is "bad" and should be avoided.((Of course, nothing is ever inherently "good" or "bad", but that's not the point here.)) Every conception of ideas that I ever had relies on it's own little "history", just like scientific discovery is always a history in of itself. However, this is not what I mean when I say "history". Scientific discoveries may have historic //context//, but they stand on their own without it. Gold doesn't react with oxygen, which makes it useful for applications where rust would present major problems. This is a fact, and other facts may have been established in the past. I may care about individual facts that were established in the past, but I do not care about //how they came to be//, ie. the "history" part of that discovery. I don't know how and why this chemical property of gold was discovered, and I don't know what other elements scientists or alchemists have looked at. Irrelevant. If I need something that doesn't rust **and** isn't gold then I can consult previously established facts or do some scientific inquiry to find that out, but this still does not necessitate "history". **Just because a fact was established in the past (like "water melts or freezes at 0°C") doesn't make it history.** If you still think it does, then it's probably a [[Words]] issue. ====== Modern day context of History ====== //**"**// History is written by victors. //**"**// ~Winston Churchill, though it's not to be taken literally. There is more to history (a lot more) and history doesn't stop after the victors. There are a few problems with the discussion of History in the present day. Number one is that our recollection of past events is biased. Someone without the means to immortalize their deeds is forgotten, while someone //with// those means may have immortalized //anything but// deeds. In the past, for example, writing history will have pretty much been reserved to kings and queens, while the greatest bulk of humanity will have been in positions that prevent them from making any lasting impacts at all. We still have their pottery((I use this symbolically to represent all kinds of evidence we have about those who weren't written about much.)), but that only gives us a very limited perspective on the past. There is a common discussion about the "A people's history of X"-kind of books which are meant to be a less biased, more accurate representation of humanity, but ultimately those books will //still// be just as uninteresting as those we have about great kings, queens, commanders and warriors. They will //still// write about systemic issues and that it will have been hard to address them; essentially they will prove to us that //history may not repeat, but it does rhyme//.\\ Another problem with history is that it is very easy to lie about. //Not only// did the people in the past lie((Caesar lied about some of the barbarians he fought. He presented the weakest village sloths as great and amazing warriors to oversell his village raids as grand victories as a means further his political campaign, even though he absolutely swamped those villagers.)), people in the modern day lie as well. History is very easy to present in very different narratives depending on how you want it, by leaving out facts, changing some or completely manufacturing others. Whatever you do, there are good odds that you will find historic "evidence" that supports your position. It takes wide knowledge of a topic and a holistic understanding of the people, the dynamics, individuals and pretty much every piece of evidence that can be gathered on a topic to properly analyze and understand individual ones [individual pieces of evidence]. Most things that can be said about history can be defended by //something// and discussions over the most banale things can therefore go on forever if at least one side of the discussion does //not// know what they are talking about. For example, there will be many people who will claim that Hitler was amazing, and they //will// find stuff that will - on the surface - seem to support this hypothesis. Laymen like myself and most of society may still feel like up to the task to engage that person and lay out just why and how this is wrong, but as anyone who has ever talked to a conspiracy theorist will know, if they're deep enough into it then they //will// eventually outmatch you. And those people //know// how to lie, distort and misrepresent. History is particularly susceptible to this. ====== Although... ====== This is not to say that learning about history is completely useless or that it shouldn't be done. History can be a great tool for personal development. Above all, history is the greatest tool to explain the status quo. However bad, history is usually the best way to explain why things are currently the way they are - especially when things are BAD the way they are, like rules and regulations. History is why we still have pseudo-monarchies in the world, why religions still have such a strong grasp on society and the views of individuals (homophobia, etc.) and so much more. So, while history can explain how it came to how things //are//, deliberation of how things //should// be and how to get there is better left to //other// fields of study.\\ On another note, history //is// a valid and legitimate point for scientific inquiry. Assessing and preserving human history (and beyond!) shall provide us with scientific insight not elsewhere gained - we don't know all things that people before us or even just the world in general have known. There are tons of scientific insight buried all across earth, bones, corpses, relics, sediments/rocks and whatever else you can come up with, all of which tell us things we haven't known before and may give us utmost important clues about biology (evolution was "discovered" as a result of inquiring about history, for example), geology, physics, astronomy, cultures (and by extension social sciences), psychology or just [[nature of things|the nature of things]]. Again, in this context I //do// care about history because it finds ways to be useful to us //today//. ====== Historical Context ====== //See the full page on [[Secularization]].//\\ There is one aspect of history that I like in particular, and it has to do with "learning how things in the present came to be": Putting things into historical context. For example, the modern day wave of discrimination against [[transgender]] is just one step in a centuries-long fight against discrimination of **all** kind. The only thing that changed is the exact position of the [[Overton Window]], but not its implications. These days it's mostly against Transgender, Homosexuality and Mental Illness((And let's not forget scientists, climate activists, vegans (or at least vegan food-alternatives), foreigners, the poor, the unemployed, the young and so many more...)), back then it was black people, even more homosexuals, jews and women((Not to say that any of these problems are no longer problems nowadays, I am just saying that the bulk of discrimination used to focus on different things at different points in time.)), before that it was slaves, then before that unbelievers of Christianity heretics, witches, still more jews; the Romans used to discriminate against Christians when //that// started to pick up steam(([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire|Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire]], from Wikipedia. It was only local and sporadic, but it's one of the easier things to find. Point is that the Romans too had things to discriminate against, including slaves.)). In contrast, //they// didn't even //think// of discriminating people for their color. History shows us that there have always been brake discs (the Romans, [[Christianity|Christians]], racists, homophobes, modern day bigots, etc.) pressing themselves really hard against the wheel of societal progress, yet the wheel always kept on turning. They will lose this battle like they lost every other battle in the history of mankind, but it will probably take some time. Some may call this.. encouraging? Remember, though, that this is not an argument against trans discrimination. Trans discrimination is bad because the premises it is based on are flawed, not because((//Claiming// being the operative term here. //Maybe// all these things are disconnected, I can't prove that this is a fact.)) it is the same as many //other// things that were proven as wrong before. ====== TL;DR ====== Posit me one piece of information that meets the following criteria:\\ 1) It must "be history".\\ 2) It must be **necessary** to make good decisions about modern day problems.\\ 3) It must not be information directly related to the modern day.((I mean that I accept //some// parts of history as useful, in that they are directly related to the modern day. For example, some words or graphics may have historic connotations that aren't directly reconstructible just by looking at them, hiding in themselves meaning that is historic //in nature// (read: the swastika, "From the river to the sea", etc). If these symbols are used today, then one should at least know history well enough to understand what they mean (whether they are an expression of hate or similar things).))((And //yes//, I //know// that the Nazis stole the swastika from someone else.))\\ 4) It must be a piece of information that **cannot** be deduced just from modern philosophy and looking at the modern day. ---- Essentially, the //spirit// of this challenge is that you close your eyes to find your inner balance, think of a historic event you are knowledgeable about and tell me one useful conclusion from it that I couldn't know without history.((Again, this excludes things that are directly related to the present - swastikas are used in the modern day, so knowing their meaning is essential.))\\ **I claim that you cannot find such a piece of insight - and I say that**, except in special cases like mentioned in 3), **all information required to navigate the modern day can be deduced from looking at the modern day, making history redundant.** March 15 marks the day of Caesar's assassination. What is it about the assassination of Caesar that makes history important? Is the fact that some emperor on -44/03/15 got fragged going to be useful factual knowledge to me one day? Is it the overarching message, that Caesar pushed his political luck a bit too far and that playing the game of political power creates problems? And if so, why would I be unable to know this just by thinking rationally?