Let me open this forum with a quotation I found recently:

"There's a good reason why nobody studies history, it just teaches you too much." Noam Chomsky

History can never be too informative. It certainly shows us the ugliest face of humanity many times, but we must look back on that so we can improve ourselves and create a brighter future, where the mistakes of the past stay mistakes of the past.

History cannot tell us anything (about human behaviour in present and future), because the situation will never be the same again and that's why studying history is a waste of time.

That's about what BF Skinner said in his nice novel Walden Two.
(Not letterly, can't reach the book right now..)
I agree... ;)

I strongly disagree. This sentence is simply not logical, it only seems so. Why can a situation before in history tell us nothing, only because it is not exactly the same like now? That's simply nonsense when you take a closer look at it, because the situations are comparible and one can extract the important similarities which are neccessary for understanding circumstances. That is in fact the same as economics do, they extract important criteria from the reality and build a model of it, in order to understand how reality functions and to predict the future. Look at the famous sentence panem et circenses - isn't it today as valid as 2000 years ago?

By the way, I don't think Skinner is an authority in any way - his Behavioursim is so extremely myopic...

This post was last modified: 27.11.2007 13:15 by Malone.

anyone who seeks this out wants the detail. it''s what makes it interesting.

I know it as:
"If we do not learn the lessons of history, we are forced to repeat them"

But very difficult, after only to quarters of government history

So, lets say like POTUSS:
...but we must look back on that so we can improve ourselves and create a brighter future, where the mistakes of the past stay mistakes of the past.

Cheers to all, on brighter futures!

What about this one:

The history is written by the winners.

That`s why history is never objective and true, it has soo many angles to look from. But still - I like it [/i]

Yes, I think this might play a role, but in much cases (especially in newer history), sources of both sides exist. So you have to look at the singular case. I want to add some point of view, which in my eyes often doesn't get the necessary attention: the thing that history might be a bit like the news. Concerning most about big political or military stuff, we tend to forget to judge history from the people's point of view. Their life circumstances, their economic situation, their customs and ways of living. You know, its a bit like: "Every day I see one reform concerning money cuts passing the parliament, one war and two nature catastrophes, so mankind is bad and supposed to die soon while our country goes bankrupt." That doesn't draw a realistic picture of the past situation, because it only look at special events.

The original is by George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

@Graf Dummdreist: Rettet die Wale - esst mehr Pandas!
Aber Deiner ist eigentlich noch besser.

I know it as:
"If we do not learn the lessons of history, we are forced to repeat them"

But very difficult, after only to quarters of government history

So, lets say like POTUSS:
...but we must look back on that so we can improve ourselves and create a brighter future, where the mistakes of the past stay mistakes of the past.

Cheers to all, on brighter futures!

This.