Thinking about the END OF HISTORY.

[Arminius]

H. G. Wells was inaugurated.

?? inaugurated as what?

And no, I never read the book.
But have seen the films.

Inaugurated as one of them.
__________________________________________________

Now I have to go to in a few miles distant place to see the final football match of the FIFA World Cup: Germany - Argentina. My tip: 3 - 0.

[Arminius]

What do you think about my tip and about those "films" you mentioned, James?
_________________________________________________________

In in the next hours you can't reach me by posting.

I will be back later, perhaps tomorrow.

[James S Saint]

What do you think about my tip

I did tell you that I am from Texas, where soccer is for woe-men.

and about those "films" you mentioned, James?

What do I think about the H.G. Wells films?
I think that he, like many, were aware of the thoughts of powerful men. But unlike the "conspiracy theorists", he simply made fictional films exposing the concepts without naming names. That is the way to get the word out in the West.

And I still don't know what you mean by "inaugurated him as one of them".

[Arminius]

What do I think about the H.G. Wells films?
I think that he, like many, were aware of the thoughts of powerful men. But unlike the "conspiracy theorists", he simply made fictional films exposing the concepts without naming names. That is the way to get the word out in the West.

Primarly he wrote books. Did he also make films?

And I still don't know what you mean by "inaugurated him as one of them".

He was one of them.

[James S Saint]

What do I think about the H.G. Wells films?
I think that he, like many, were aware of the thoughts of powerful men. But unlike the "conspiracy theorists", he simply made fictional films exposing the concepts without naming names. That is the way to get the word out in the West.

Primarly he wrote books. Did he also make films?

No. I meant the films from his books.

And I still don't know what you mean by "inaugurated him as one of them".

He was one of them.

I just don't know what you mean by "inaugurated" as one of them. He was president and one of the founders of the RCSA, "Royal College of Science Association", a writer, and armchair-sociologist. So in that sense, he was influential in the social trends and thus "one of them". But his writings were warnings of impending potential disaster, turning out to be real. The problem is that with all stories, the ending has to be that the "good guys" win, whoever they happen to be. So he had to have the humans win, regardless of his actual preference in the matter. He was a globalist (yet anti-Zionist), as many were (and still very many are). And globalism is certainly responsible for the disaster, far more than merely technology. So yeah, he was "one of them".

[Arminius]

The word "inaugurated" means something like the word "adepted", right?

[James S Saint]

The word "inaugurated" means something like the word "adepted", right?

An inauguration is a ceremony to announce a member into a group, usually as a leader.

[Arminius]

An inauguration is a ceremony to announce a member into a group, usually as a leader.

Yeah, and that's almost exactly what I meant.

[Arminius]

When the world is being reprogrammed, they prefer to erase the old truths before instilling the new truths. They do that by going through several generations of denying all truth (a "dark era"). By the time they get done, it might be true that the world wars never took place. Or perhaps that they were a wars that the Chinese started with the French. All books and records indicating anything other than the new history will be destroyed. And anyone implying anything other than "what everyone knows to be true" will be laughed at, before arrested and forcefully reprogrammed or just erased.

You are right: Denying the truth can also lead to an end of history, at least to a temporary end of history (until the new history begins). And you are also right by saying: All books and records indicating anything other than the new history will be destroyed. And anyone implying anything other than "what everyone knows to be true" will be laughed at, before arrested and forcefully reprogrammed or just erased. This has been becoming the real sitaution since the beginning of the "machine age".

[James S Saint]

Deus ex Machina, the aspiration and eschatology of Man.

[Arminius]

To you, there is no hope for the human beings, right?

[James S Saint]

To you, there is no hope for the human beings, right?

I wouldn't put it at zero just yet, but it is really pushing it hard and fast.

[Arminius]

To you, there is no hope for the human beings, right?

I wouldn't put it at zero just yet, but it is really pushing it hard and fast.

But to you (and b.t.w.: not to me!) the end of history would be almost the same like the end of human beings, right?

[James S Saint]

To you, there is no hope for the human beings, right?

I wouldn't put it at zero just yet, but it is really pushing it hard and fast.

But to you (and b.t.w.: not to me!) the end of history would be almost the same like the end of human beings, right?

Which one you want to refer to is arbitrary to me.

[Arminius]

If history is lost but human development not lost, then you can see the real Eloi or the "renaissance" of the Stone Age life.

[James S Saint]

If history is lost but human development not lost, then you can see the real Eloi or the "renaissance" of the Stone Age life.

If you were there to see it.

[Orbie]

History will never be lost, only the sense of it will be lost. Keep the sense of it, You keep history.
can this be done?

[James S Saint]

History will never be lost, only the sense of it will be lost. Keep the sense of it, You keep history.
can this be done?

Sure. Just rewrite it every few hundred years... always fresh... always a reason to fight over it... eternal fresh carnage.

No reason to let it go to waste.

[Arminius]

History will never be lost, only the sense of it will be lost. Keep the sense of it, You keep history.
can this be done?

If the sense of history will be lost, then it will make no sense to have history at all, because there will be no one who knows anything about both the sense of history and the history itself. There will be no historian, no one who knows what history and ist sense is, probably even no one with a sense for the meaning of the past for both the present and the future.

If history will totally become also a part of a modern ideology like any other cultural phenomeneon, then it will be merely part of a religious system, although a modern one, and no longer be its own system - provided that some other historical existentials will also be lost -, so the ideological (modern religious) system and its language (media) will be able then to "sweep" history under the ideological (modern religious) "carpet" and afterwards nnihilate it. That will be done, if the chance will be there - certainly. We have been seing this bad development because it has been becoming more and more obvious. Interestingly it has been having a correlation with the modern development of the machines and all the other modern developments. Thus: amongst others the machines are strongly involved in that process.

[Moreno]

History will never be lost, only the sense of it will be lost. Keep the sense of it, You keep history.
can this be done?

If the sense of history will be lost, then it will make no sense to have history at all, because there will be no one who knows anything about both the sense of history and the history itself. There will be no historian, no one who knows what history and ist sense is, probably even no one with a sense for the meaning of the past for both the present and the future.

If history will totally become also a part of a modern ideology like any other cultural phenomeneon, then it will be merely part of a religious system, although a modern one, and no longer be its own system - provided that some other historical existentials will also be lost -, so the ideological (modern religious) system and its language (media) will be able then to "sweep" history under the ideological (modern religious) "carpet" and afterwards nnihilate it. That will be done, if the chance will be there - certainly. We have been seing this bad development because it has been becoming more and more obvious. Interestingly it has been having a correlation with the modern development of the machines and all the other modern developments. Thus: amongst others the machines are strongly involved in that process.

It seems to me to have any certainty about the end of history, one must have great certainty about the variables for change and contact. IOW it would presume things like the standard model in physics is, say, 95 percent complete and we can from this and standard models in chem and bio, determine likely possible changes and encounters and, well, potential modes of life. Personally I think current science covers a much smaller % than its utterly loyal adherents have decided (intuitively!). So to me there is something more hypothetical than is stressed in the thread. If these standard models are correct and we generally extrapolate from them correctly and with good strong intuition, then the end of history is or will come [enter date or process step].

[Arminius]

History will never be lost, only the sense of it will be lost. Keep the sense of it, You keep history.
can this be done?

If the sense of history will be lost, then it will make no sense to have history at all, because there will be no one who knows anything about both the sense of history and the history itself. There will be no historian, no one who knows what history and ist sense is, probably even no one with a sense for the meaning of the past for both the present and the future.

If history will totally become also a part of a modern ideology like any other cultural phenomeneon, then it will be merely part of a religious system, although a modern one, and no longer be its own system - provided that some other historical existentials will also be lost -, so the ideological (modern religious) system and its language (media) will be able then to "sweep" history under the ideological (modern religious) "carpet" and afterwards nnihilate it. That will be done, if the chance will be there - certainly. We have been seing this bad development because it has been becoming more and more obvious. Interestingly it has been having a correlation with the modern development of the machines and all the other modern developments. Thus: amongst others the machines are strongly involved in that process.

It seems to me to have any certainty about the end of history, one must have great certainty about the variables for change and contact. IOW it would presume things like the standard model in physics is, say, 95 percent complete and we can from this and standard models in chem and bio, determine likely possible changes and encounters and, well, potential modes of life. Personally I think current science covers a much smaller % than its utterly loyal adherents have decided (intuitively!). So to me there is something more hypothetical than is stressed in the thread. If these standard models are correct and we generally extrapolate from them correctly and with good strong intuition, then the end of history is or will come [enter date or process step].

Yes, and with the utmost probability those standard models are correct.

[Moreno]

Yes, and with the utmost probability those standard models are correct.

I don't know how one determines this. Not empirically in any case. But actually there has been growing evidence that constants and laws are more local in time and space than previously thought. IOW the ontology/notion of natural law is being called into question. (which does not mean it is all just chaos, hardly) But my point was more focused on the completeness than the accuracy, though I have serious questions about the latter also. (which again does not mean I think all those experiments just ran a weird anomalous streak and mislead us.)

[Arcturus Descending]

To you, there is no hope for the human beings, right?

I wouldn't put it at zero just yet, but it is really pushing it hard and fast.

Oh, Jimmy, you're such a pessimistic creature.

Humanity has often let humanity down - at first - but then it's also come to its own defenses with great courage and solidarity.

We just can't really know about the end of history.

[Historyboy]

As Vollgraff put it, as long as there is a drive for society, there is a self-preservation instinct in people.

[James S Saint]

Yeah, no man has ever fallen from a high mountain, because his great spirit and courage prevents his fall.
Man never gets so lustfully drunk that his will to survive doesn't prevent any car wreck.
...ummhuh.