Politicians and investors increasingly turn to disaster theories to predict the future. Does history repeat and can we learn from it? It’s time to take The Sniff Test.
A great, thought-provoking piece that led me to wonder if the delayed development of the prefrontal cortex plays a role in the human tendency to repeat mistakes from history. After all, if we are not able to make sound decisions until our mid-to-late twenties, then we're more likely to make impulsive or emotional choices that could lead to negative consequences.
Hmm, interesting. As we learn from our conjecture about what we see and hear, I suspect that we generate a reason why we think something happened and convince ourselves we will not do the same.
e.g. Hitler was a nutter hell bent on war and {insert world leader} I am dealing with now is sane and reasonable.
This would miss the point that Hitler was symptomatic of his time, as all leaders are, and his personality was a minor factor in what caused World War II. Thus when a similar situation arises - e.g. perceived humiliation of a nation (Russia) - the wrong history is remembered.
A really thought provoking article. I would add the one piece of the jigsaw not mentioned is the effect of religion over the last 2,000 years in what is otherwise viewed as a scientific and philosophical debate. After all, the doomsday scenario is a feature of all three of the main religions as all claim the world will end in an apocalyptic manner and is the one that has lasted to this day
The Enlightenment was regarded by Rome as nothing more than a conspiracy theory to be met with the harshest of ripostes, arguably because when your entire raison d’etre is constructed over 1500 years of revealed truth and you cannot err, so any who dares to suggest the Earth rotates the Sun must be discredited by all means possible
I think this is where we are now, but in a far broader sense given the amount of information available. There is far more wheat and chaff to sift through and both are available to far more people and the simple fact is the old guard (sic the elites/the establishment) are losing control
As Stephen Fry said, ‘do you know who the last person they would now accept is ? That Galilean carpenter upon which their church is built’
His Word is law also applied to the Sovereign as the representative on earth. This was true regardless of the religion and the nature of the sovereign.
Where there was an Enlightenment, remembering large parts of the world still have sovereign authority, this gave way to our Word is law. While the people are sovereign notionally, there has been 300+ years debating how and why to put that into practice.
Christianity though has several claimants (historically and presently) to be the sovereign on Earth whether that be the the Pope in Rome, the Coptic Pope in Egypt or the Russian orthodox patriarch, whereas Islam does not have a single figurehead which simply reflects the fissure between and within them
Given that Islam is the newest of the three great religions and arguably still in its first flush, does this mean therefore that the journey to secular enlightenment is just a question of time and information
Simon's most interesting (and worrying) article to date. A must read!
Thanks Paul, I appreciate your support and readership.
A great, thought-provoking piece that led me to wonder if the delayed development of the prefrontal cortex plays a role in the human tendency to repeat mistakes from history. After all, if we are not able to make sound decisions until our mid-to-late twenties, then we're more likely to make impulsive or emotional choices that could lead to negative consequences.
Hmm, interesting. As we learn from our conjecture about what we see and hear, I suspect that we generate a reason why we think something happened and convince ourselves we will not do the same.
e.g. Hitler was a nutter hell bent on war and {insert world leader} I am dealing with now is sane and reasonable.
This would miss the point that Hitler was symptomatic of his time, as all leaders are, and his personality was a minor factor in what caused World War II. Thus when a similar situation arises - e.g. perceived humiliation of a nation (Russia) - the wrong history is remembered.
A really thought provoking article. I would add the one piece of the jigsaw not mentioned is the effect of religion over the last 2,000 years in what is otherwise viewed as a scientific and philosophical debate. After all, the doomsday scenario is a feature of all three of the main religions as all claim the world will end in an apocalyptic manner and is the one that has lasted to this day
The Enlightenment was regarded by Rome as nothing more than a conspiracy theory to be met with the harshest of ripostes, arguably because when your entire raison d’etre is constructed over 1500 years of revealed truth and you cannot err, so any who dares to suggest the Earth rotates the Sun must be discredited by all means possible
I think this is where we are now, but in a far broader sense given the amount of information available. There is far more wheat and chaff to sift through and both are available to far more people and the simple fact is the old guard (sic the elites/the establishment) are losing control
As Stephen Fry said, ‘do you know who the last person they would now accept is ? That Galilean carpenter upon which their church is built’
His Word is law also applied to the Sovereign as the representative on earth. This was true regardless of the religion and the nature of the sovereign.
Where there was an Enlightenment, remembering large parts of the world still have sovereign authority, this gave way to our Word is law. While the people are sovereign notionally, there has been 300+ years debating how and why to put that into practice.
I am mulling what, if anything, could come next.
Christianity though has several claimants (historically and presently) to be the sovereign on Earth whether that be the the Pope in Rome, the Coptic Pope in Egypt or the Russian orthodox patriarch, whereas Islam does not have a single figurehead which simply reflects the fissure between and within them
Given that Islam is the newest of the three great religions and arguably still in its first flush, does this mean therefore that the journey to secular enlightenment is just a question of time and information
A big question; it may be time to look at the competing theories about progress.