Dio's quote on history

[Tahir2]

Dio wrote here:
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=194960#194960

I do feel that more people should read and study history because it's the best way I've found to learn about perspective, objectivity, and bias, and of course because those who fail to learn the mistakes of the past are condemmed to repeat them (that's a famous quote, but can't remember who it was).

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana, The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905

When writing this he was talking about infancy and barbarism I believe. I don't know if Santayana actually heard this from elsewhere. Santayana was an American Philosopher of Hispanic-American origin. It took me a little while to find that quote, oft-heard but almost never creditted.

Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history. George Bernard Shaw

I believe Hegel and Bernard Shaw got it right, as learning from history is admitting to ones present mistakes and admitting you are wrong is something the ego cannot handle. So we fight ourselves if we try to remain objective - a fight most of us lose.

I think your recommendation to learn and study history is commendable and I wish more journalists (whatever their chosen subject to cover) would be wise to learn from it. It would be most profitable to them IMHO.

However separation from events does not always tend to lead to better retelling of history. We miss the minute details which are the big details in the larger picture and it is simple, we humans enjoy to make others suffer as long as we believe we will not suffer in consequence to it. Carl Sagan advised humanity to benefit and alleviate poverty worldwide not only because it is befitting of the human spirit but because of selfish needs. He argued that poverty has been the primary cause for the exponential growth in the worlds human population - a rate that will dry up all resources. We are doubling the worlds population every 40 years or so (Billions and Billions - Carl Sagan).

How do we look at what Carl Sagan said? Was he being selfish or wise? Hardly anyone does anything that will benefit another without some kind of reward that is tangible here and now and mostly immediate. He gave us a reward to work towards. I would say he was being wise and had an understanding on the nature of humankind.

I posted this here as this was so off-topic from the original thread.

 

[Dio]

I would certainly agree that this is a long way off the original topic!

I've never been a general Sagan 'fan' - he has many devotees - but he sometimes talks a lot of sense, IIRC particularly about the weak anthropic principle (which I scored several points with in drunken conversations with friends before I found out someone else had already come up with the same thing).

Fundamentally I really do believe there's no such thing as too much knowledge - and history is a cornerstone of all knowledge.

I'm blessed and cursed with a refusal to take anything completely seriously. It makes one sometimes callous and often cynical, but it does seem to have advantages in terms of perspective. It probably has a lot of disadvantages too, but from inside your own head they're always hard to spot...

In particular, I try not to get too much of a sense of perspective of one's place in the universe. Douglas Adams' writings in HHGTG on "The one thing we cannot afford in is a sense of perspective" has too much truth in it for the potentially depressive . I do think that if someone genuinely thinks about 'their place in history' it might be worth them thinking about this. "We are but dust in the wind" (or similar quote, Bill 'N Ted's Excellent Adventure, to Socrates).

By 'eck, we're getting dangerously close to philosophy here. I knew I should have gone for that Ph.D after all so I could alledgedly have a clue what I was talking about...

 

[Tahir2]

I dont have any credentials either, not in this field or any other.

I only quoted Sagan because he was saying humans are shortsighted. This is what I agree with. It can be shown that poverty is not the main cause of the exponential growth in the human population at all, depending on who you read or listen to.

edit:
You quote Bill 'n' Ted and vis-a-vis Socrates, but it depends on your perspective. Right now my perspective is that I am the most important facet of this whole Universe. And when you realise that probably everyone thinks the same, it shouldn't lead to depression but a mild state of dementia.

 

[Dio]

Well, everyone should understand that they are the most important person in at least one universe (the one viewed from inside their own head).

I worry that there are people who believe they are the most important person in more than that universe... this attitude worries me, although there are undoubtedly people who would place others' opinions and lives above their own and have good reasons for doing so - dying for your country isn't the fashion it once was, but the idea that one's relatives, particularly childrens lives are more important than ones own is not.

It's a great talent to be able to step outside ones own worldview - this is where real objectivity begins...

 

[Nathan]

I worry that there are people who believe they are the most important person in more than that universe... this attitude worries me, although there are undoubtedly people who would place others' opinions and lives above their own and have good reasons for doing so - dying for your country isn't the fashion it once was, but the idea that one's relatives, particularly childrens lives are more important than ones own is not.

These days, it seems that celebrity worship is the fad. A trait I find particularly disturbing (especially considering MJs actions). Why are we making actors and sports stars lives more important than our own? :?

 

[Tahir2]

Cos we think our lives suck?

 

[Nathan]

I don't think so. I feel we haven't come to grips with the powerful influence and reach that modern media has. Instead of seeing the village strongman as our hero, we now have celebrities. The problem is compounded by the carefully constructed image that is portrayed to us. They are divorced from the problems that many of us suffer, their opinions (however poorly contructed) are given greater weight than ours. We see them as shining examples of what we wish to be, and this image isn't just shown to a few people - millions see it.

There is no history to teach us about the effect of media brainwashing. While I agree that studying history gives us a sense of perspective, it doesn't help to eliminate all the mistakes of the future. Our world is constantly changing, some of the things history teaches us no longer apply, and we have new problems that history can't help us with.

 

[Dio]

I agree completely about the celebrity-worship being an aspect of society that I'm not a fan of.

There is no history to teach us about the effect of media brainwashing.

Not sure about that. There are plenty of examples of the use of propaganda throughout history. Dr. Göbels is only the most obvious example; there were similar examples on 'our side', particularly during WW1. The media campaigns during the Peninsular War, where Earl Grey et.al. stirred up anti-Wellington feeling in the Whig press and the government defended his actions in the Tory press are an interesting example - the cult of personality played a strong part and this is as far back as 1810. Personality politics and 'tabloid' press attitudes are very much a Victorian invention.

Undoubtedly history cannot stop mistakes; avoiding making the same mistakes is the goal of studying history for the great and the good, while spotting the mistakes they should have avoided might be the best us plebes can hope for... depressing? maybe.

 

[Nathan]

Sorry, I meant in the context of celebrity worship.

At least that's my story, and I'm sticking with it.

 

[Dio]

Extrapolation to different contexts is another valuable skill. If a bit hit-and-miss!

 

[Tahir2]

With history study (I only did it at A' Level standard) one important aspect is the evaluation and critique of evidence. For example is it first hand, second hand or third hand? Also to look at the context of the evidence with regards to other events happening at the time to find its purpose at the time and its value looking back in hindsight. This can help figuring out the motives for the evidence, its effects, and its reliability.

And celebrity worship IMHO is an extension of the innate human desire to look for something better than itself in other objects, be they human, divine or a graphics card.

 

[Dio]

Well, I never got as far as A-level, but I did find history more of a science than an art. I'd have gladly gone on and done it if I hadn't got more interested in superconductors and writing games.

Most of the people I feel inferior to are a. hardware engineers, b. comedians and c. sports stars. I have a nice clear reason for each, and it's only to do with their skills. I don't think they're 'better people'. Personally I think that's a pretty well balanced attitude...

Of course, when it comes to sports skills I'd be inferior to a well-trained cheese sandwich. I know my place. Doesn't stop me playing though, I just have to not mind losing a lot (think I've only ever won one game of squash, but it's enormous fun).