Thinking about the END OF HISTORY.

If history can be rewritten wouldn’t that fictionalize history and create a long novel out of it. I always thought that the historical process consists of rinsing fiction out of history in order to create a more accurate tableau of our dubious activities. There’s a lot of 20th century history still in arrears for that kind of purification.

The End of History occurs when history is no-longer written but imagined.

Seems that way so far. Have you ever watched “Reality TV”? Were you aware that the entire thing was totally fictional? How would you know? How would you know how much history has been massaged and/or invented? Many professors (especially the French) proclaim that all of it is fictional and always will be.

Of course, that is what you are supposed to think.
What? Did you expect them to say, “Okay, we have invented a new history for the Middle East now. You can download it at ..

Why do you expect people to let you know when they are deceiving you?

Why do you think they keep saying, “Reality is only in your mind”?

Ten generations from now, there might not have ever been a WW1, much less WW2. Who will be there to argue?

It has been proposed that someone very prominent is soon to finally announce to the world that space aliens have finally arrived, along with obvious proof of it. How would you know whether they are lying or not? If the media promotes it, it won’t be long before the majority accepts it, whether they ever really believed it or not. Another generation, and it will be incontrovertible fact - “historical events created” - and no one the wiser.

Yes, I know. No one lies on TV without you finding out about it. How else would you know who to believe?

Haven’t you read the “Cezarian comments” which caused that what only you mean, Only Humean?
Haven’t you noticed the “previous history” of that what only you mean, Only Humean?

Why don’t you throw out that stalker, that troublemaker, that most arrogant troll of this forum?
Why is he allowed to insult anybody and everybody? And why are other posters not allowed to criticise that bad personal character?

Does a philosophy forum with the name “I Love Philosophy” really want nothing else than bad “philosophy”?

With the utmost probability, yes, but humans had had their very, very long time without any history, so it is also possible that in the future humans will again have no history, and therefor the androids will help them very much.

What all this seems to imply based on what you write is there can be no End of History because it never even started. We could instead interpret it as if it were some long soap opera encompassing thousands of volumes. This would seem to make history suspect of being more of a Virtual Reality story but I’m not willing to go that far. The stories have to come from somewhere but I will concede that if we could time travel to events which history now records much would have to be rewritten with a corresponding shock of historical proportions to our system.

The “end of history” is not a very much fixed term.

The „historical existentials“ are merely points of reference in order to find out, whether history has ended or not.

“The superman’s Dionysian will to overpower would save the past from drowning in democracy’s shallow waters by willing the eternal return of past inequalities. The superman’s willing of this eternal return is possible only if his will can emancipate itself from hatred of its past, a hatred responsible for modern egalitarian demands to be liberated from that past. […] Modern thinkers culminating in Nietzsche made men aware that human creativity or technology was not limited by anything. Nietzsche feared that contemporary egalitarians would employ this unlimited power to create a world of universal peace and equality. He yearned for a superman whose will to overpower nihilism and egalitarianism would use modernity’s immense power to create the eternal return of the past’s inequality and wars. Then there would be no wars to end all wars.” (Harry Neumann, Liberalism, pp. 164-66.)
Nietzsche’s doctrine includes 3 large teaching pieces:

(1) Übermensch (“Overman”, “Superman”);
(2) Ewige Wiederkehr (“Eternal Return”);
(3) Wille zur Macht (“Will to power”).


I give you three examples of the Übermensch:

size=114 Napoleon (1769-1821);
(2) Hitler (1889-1945);
(3) … (2009-2069).[/size]
If we take this examples seriously for a moment, then we notice that the first Übermensch failed, that the second Übermensch failed, and that the third Übermensch is 5 years old. So we ask: Who and where is the third Übermensch? This reminds us of the time when Jesus was born and Herodes killed all the little children in his country in order to prevent a coming competitor, a coming rival.

Is there anybody who believes in that?

Don’t worry Humean, the first and foremost condition for women to become equal with men is that the men become nervous.

To me, it depends on what you really mean by “Übermensch”. If you are talking about the public figure, the lacky puppet (Bush, Obama, Hitler, that sort), then there will certainly be such a person held up for public view. But if you mean a person who on his own managed to bring the world into the order he chose, the “Real Übermensch”, that isn’t going to happen.

The Real Übermensch is not a single person. As it is said (very largely true), “God has no respect for the individual”.

The Real Übermensch is an idea, an “Angel”. And that Übermensch certainly is going to happen and in a sense, is already walking the Earth, gathering his armies.

They can and will kill off as many people as they like in an effort to destroy all hope of their competitor, just as before. The first strategy is to weaken all that is not yourself so as to strengthen your relative power - the use of natural entropy, the “Devil”. But the glory that is brought from that strategy turns out to be self defeating and thus is inherently “cast into Hell to rule over it” because that is all it really can do, create Hell, Chaos, perpetual discontent. And is eventually un-admired.

The idea that arises after such an event, is based upon doing the opposite, as is always the case as every over balance inspires counter balance. That is what causes the eras of “light and dark”, the “Days” (in scriptural terms).

But eventually even that swaying back and forth between eras of enlightenment and abysmal darkness becomes the focus of the imbalance and inspires its counter-balance. It inspires the aspiration for balance known as “The End of Days” because true balance doesn’t inspire counter-balance efforts.

So it is really an “Angel”, an idea that brings in the final Übermensch. There will no doubt be a person prompted up to represent such an event as its “leader”; a Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Gandhi, Hitler, Napoleon, or whoever.

But that too is well known and thus they must attempt to destroy any potential ideas from coming to Man as a competitor to their lust for power. That constitutes a “War in Heaven” (already underway). And the end result of that war comes in two steps. One step is when it is clear that the war has been won. The second step is when a quiet, never noticed voice speaks up for the first time, “Umm… guys? Excuse me, guys? What about me?” And in almost a single instant, all of the power gained by all of the lust and warring is shaken and redistributed into the true “End of Days”, “end of typical history” and nothing like what they had imagined or designed.

I doubt that there will be a propped up puppet for that last paradigm shift, but perhaps. So I don’t know if you want to call that an Übermensch or not.

The Ubermench can not be avoided. However he can change the outcome by limiting entropy by synthesis of the imbalance into relative balance. He will develop a conscience, and therefore overcome the total reduction by synthesizing rather then incorporating in-assumable, incongruent elements.

The fear of eternal recurrence in the new world especially is s symptom of a dread of stasis=stagnation. One president who was not elected, Jimmy Carter saw this, as the limiting function of capital. Kant never moved from his native town, went on the same nature hikes during all his lifetime. The categorical realization is the sine qua non is the fulfillment of what should and what has to be realized.

The probability of this may very well be 20-80%.

The so-called Übermensch in concept or actuality is thoroughly useless if there are not those who follow in his wake. In the entire history of the human race there has never been a “majority” of ONE and for as long as he does not exist everyone’s imagination - meaning all those who are not yet Übermenschen - will only yield their own limited description of what that should mean.

The majority fully incapable of understanding one single man?

 One man not understanding the majority?The burden is on the one man.

There are ways for a single person to alter the way a society behaves and to a degree control it. But most, if not all of those ways are based on handed-down authority; “Because I hold the secret ancient ring of Methuselah….” - “Lord of the Rings”.

Hitler went to a lot of trouble to find such things for himself, but nothing compared to the efforts made recently.

The burden is on the ignorant. Nobody wanted to talk to Nietzsche live. They sacrifice the best.


According to Christianity there are three roles of the Übermensch possible:

size=114 Übermensch acts the role of the Antichrist;
(2) Übermensch acts the role of the Katechon;
(3) Übermensch acts any other role.[/size]
The Katechon is the antagonist of the Antichrist. Any other role may also mean the synthetic role of the Antichrist and the Katechon.

With reference to the three examples of the Übermensch one can say that the third Übermensch - we may call him “SONAH” (Synthesis of Napoleon and Hitler) - will as fail as the first and the second Übermensch. But which role he acts is as unknown as his identity.

Why can the Übermensch not be avoided, Obe?

Well, that brought back some memories.

Very long ago, I saw that someone was trying to force the return of Christ. And I thought, “Are they really that insane?” Long after that, I have come to realize that sure enough, they really are (“We live on The Planet of the Apes”). It also became very apparent long ago, that the effort to destroy the current “statue of Man” in order to form a newer “bigger” (but not really better) model of Man was under way (an underlying theme in the new released film Captain America). My only issue was that it wasn’t being designed to be better, merely bigger and thus all of the misery being created was pointless. In the film, Captain America saves the world from the man bent on destroying the old world for sake of his new world order. So obviously the Katechon is Captain America. :sunglasses:

Trying to save Man by destroying the old order is easy, except for that “saving” bit after the destruction. The effort these days to destroy Man is basically the same as that to destroy all life on Earth, rebooting all life, not merely Man. Even I could reboot life given no other life around (except my own). But what would really be the point?

It seems that they are thinking, “Man cannot be saved until Man is utterly destroyed” (the Antichrist/Destroyer released). So maybe what I see as the inexplicable weakness of the Catholic Church is starting to make sense, “We need to turn the Devil loose so as to allow Jesus to return”. That does seem to fit their recent behavior.

And this gets back to Man vs Machine. Life is very, very tenacious and doesn’t really care if Man is a part of it or not, thus as far as Life is concerned, machines are just fine, perhaps better. All organic life might well be destroyed in Man’s insanity, but Life will continue regardless.

There seems no end to the insanity of Man.