Does our species control the arc of it's own history? If not, what does?

[rousseau]

The question is - do human beings have either partial or full control over their own history? And if not, what dictates the over-arching direction of the same history?

 

[Politesse]

Yes, in that it is produced by our objects and desires. No, in that those objects and desires are largely a product of our environment and circumstances, over which we exercise little real control either as individuals, classes, or as a species.

 

[DBT]

I voted 'unclear' because we have no real cohesion as a species. There are two many divisions, political, religious, ideological, etc, standing in the way of controlling our future. Not to mention how the environment shapes the decisions we make.

 

[bilby]

Yeah, people 'control' the arc of history the same way that a tug-o-war team 'controls' the direction that the centre of the rope moves in.

If enough people decide to pull hard enough in a given direction, then they can make things happen. But generally you can't get them to do that, and if you do, they won't do it for long.

The difference is that the possible directions for a tug-o-war are twofold - but the possible directions for history are countless. Which makes the problem a LOT harder.

 

[bigfield]

I think individual humans have negligible control over history, and if we want to understand why history unfolds as it does, we need to model the behaviour of human populations.

 

[bilby]

I think individual humans have negligible control over history, and if we want to understand why history unfolds as it does, we need to model the behaviour of human populations.

I agree. Individuals like to try, but are invariably the victims of unintended consequences.

 

[rousseau]

Yes, in that it is produced by our objects and desires. No, in that those objects and desires are largely a product of our environment and circumstances, over which we exercise little real control either as individuals, classes, or as a species.

I once heard someone on Twitter mention something along the lines of:

"Human history is a sub-set of ecological history"

When you think about it it's obvious, but I think unintuitive to most due to the common misconception that we're masters of our environment. Many people think there is some smart group of people, somewhere in the distance, quietly protecting us from disaster. Unfortunately that group of people doesn't exist.

 

[Politesse]

Yes, in that it is produced by our objects and desires. No, in that those objects and desires are largely a product of our environment and circumstances, over which we exercise little real control either as individuals, classes, or as a species.

I once heard someone on Twitter mention something along the lines of:

"Human history is a sub-set of ecological history"

When you think about it it's obvious, but I think unintuitive to most due to the common misconception that we're masters of our environment. Many people think there is some smart group of people, somewhere in the distance, quietly protecting us from disaster. Unfortunately that group of people doesn't exist.

Well, when I say "environment" I do not exclusively mean the natural environment. If asking questions of desire and volition, common culture seems to me a more significant factor. But then, culture itself and natural ecology are in a complex, reciprocal exchange of cause and effect.

 

[rousseau]

Yes, in that it is produced by our objects and desires. No, in that those objects and desires are largely a product of our environment and circumstances, over which we exercise little real control either as individuals, classes, or as a species.

I once heard someone on Twitter mention something along the lines of:

"Human history is a sub-set of ecological history"

When you think about it it's obvious, but I think unintuitive to most due to the common misconception that we're masters of our environment. Many people think there is some smart group of people, somewhere in the distance, quietly protecting us from disaster. Unfortunately that group of people doesn't exist.

Well, when I say "environment" I do not exclusively mean the natural environment. If asking questions of desire and volition, common culture seems to me a more significant factor. But then, culture itself and natural ecology are in a complex, reciprocal exchange of cause and effect.

That's an interesting point. In one perspective, I'd wonder how you would delineate between the 'natural' environment and our culture. Is our culture not just a (complex) part of our natural environment?

And on the other hand, the point would still stand - ecology provides the conditions for culture. The resulting culture can be highly variable, but things like food security / climate etc have huge impacts on how those cultures must look.