Arminius
(Arminius)
May 4, 2015, 11:39pm
387
Of course they are, but that is irrelevant.
So you are talking about the end of significant cultural or social changes as being “the end of history”. And I still think that the advent of the internet (for example) is a significant change in culture and society and thus is an “historical” event (along with many others previously listed). And in the relatively near future, there is the reformation of the Americas and Europe. So I can’t believe that social/cultural history has ended.
I also can’t really believe that history in the narrower sense has ended.
According to the fact that I am merely asking whether hostory has ended or not I can say that in some cases is has and in other cases it has not ended. So the conclusiobn is that histoy has probably not ended.
Some people, no doubt, believe that globulization of homosapian ends history because they think that such is the final, never changing state. It is not the final state. The glob will breakup to form a new, unpredictable rearrangement of (hopefully) humanity (else machinery, but probably cyborg-ishness).
Cyborgs are such a fundamental change that I would say that such a development is more evolutionarily than historically significant, and this does not mean that it is not historically significant.
A long way?
[size=200]=> … => … => … => … =>[/size]
A wrong way?
Arminius
(Arminius)
January 8, 2016, 11:04pm
388
Increasingly states, companies and private households reach the point, from which on the credit no longer opens but blocks the future: Growing debt services saps ever larger parts of current income - until the line is exceeded, beyond which older debts only be postponed by a cascade of new debts in a permanently paralyzed tomorrow. This situation deserves to be called “post-historical”: It completely fulfills Arnold Gehlen’s classic definition of the posthistoire as a state of high “mobility above the stationary bases” - while one would like to replace the word “stationary” by the word “untenable”
The end of History will be AD, (After the DNA Machine.) After this age, a new era of happiness and prosperity will begin.
Moreno
(Moreno)
January 13, 2016, 1:01pm
390
Arminius:
Increasingly states, companies and private households reach the point, from which on the credit no longer opens but blocks the future: Growing debt services saps ever larger parts of current income - until the line is exceeded, beyond which older debts only be postponed by a cascade of new debts in a permanently paralyzed tomorrow. This situation deserves to be called “post-historical”: It completely fulfills Arnold Gehlen’s classic definition of the posthistoire as a state of high “mobility above the stationary bases” - while one would like to replace the word “stationary” by the word “untenable”
The ways to make money that produce nothing are increasing.
Arminius
(Arminius)
February 6, 2016, 11:03pm
391
Ultimate Philosophy 1001:
The end of History will be AD, (After the DNA Machine.) After this age, a new era of happiness and prosperity will begin.
Would you mind describing how your “DNA Machine” works?
Arminius
(Arminius)
February 6, 2016, 11:04pm
392
Yes, and this has been becoming a dictatorship of inflationism, especially since the 15t of August 1971 when the US president Richard Nixon reversed the gold backing. This is just a bastard economy.
Amorphos
(Amorphos)
February 7, 2016, 8:30pm
393
.
The bank of England sold quite a lot of its gold because it was no longer needed as a basis for money. I expect American banks done the same. Its like free money! They first make the value of things upon the worth of gold, then keep the worth and sell the gold lol. I noticed that the Chinese are big on buying gold, which is jolly good of them muhahaha. All the west needs now is to get their hands on the Chinese money markets so they can drain all the wealth back, the Chinese however can see that coming hence keep stopping it.
Arminius
(Arminius)
July 10, 2016, 1:52am
395
That will end catastrophically.
Arminius:
Evolution is more natural than cultural, wheras history is more cultural than natural. It is a difference - often even a huge difference - whether living beings like the human beings develop naturally or culturally. It is a difference whether the brain of the humans has grown or the constitutional state is established by the Occidental humans. Evolution is more important than history when it comes to naturally survive. Evolution came before history - the revers is not possible. At first you, for example, have to change from an animal to an human before you can change from an natural human with natural and cultural evolution to a cultural human with natural and cultural evolution and then to a cultural human with history, thus with natural and cultural evolution, and - now: of course - cultural history.
On the way from an animal to an human:
Humans without history (in the narrower sense):
Humans with history (in the narrower sense):
You do not think that humans are created by God, do you?
The cultural world as an enclosed simulation or matrix separate from nature and evolution?
The end of human history?
An extrapolation of entropy in terms of human civilization concerning its own demise perhaps.
Arminius:
There is a difference between the “end-point of humanity’s sociocultural evolution” and the “end of humanity’s evolution”. The diffrence is namely the culture!
It is often attempted, with moderate success, to erase all knowledge of prior history so as to establish a new age founded on new premises (usually rewriting history so as to hide the old). Does that count as an “end of history”?
Maybe as a pre-stage of (the idea of) the “end of history”, but not really.
The “end of history” means the end of all great narratives, of all great stories, of all “historical existence” (Ernst Nolte), of all culture, of all great wars, and so on.
I, a bit like Hegal, can tell you where it ends up and why, but not when or how it gets there… or even what kind of species remains. Who is to be in the real Heaven? It is looking very suspiciously like it isn’t going to be human (as we were discussing on the other thread). Would that constitute an “End of History”, the end of humanity?
Some people may say that the time after the end of history is “haeven on earth”, some other people may say that the time after the end of history is “hell on earth”. There is no real historical develoment, nothing to do that really counts, boredom, happiness, perhaps it is the (last) age with machines, before the machines will completely replace all human beings (you remember! ) - this all depends upon the people’s evaluation.
Ridiculous religious notions aside it sounds like to me existential decline and stagnation due to lost momentum concerning various collapse scenarios. There are indeed multiple scenarios in which modern civilization could indeed collapse.
phyllo:
The culture will change as long as humans change. Humans change as long as they are alive.
You can see change happening very clearly as each new generation rejects the current culture and creates its own. You could say that when humans become immortal, there will be no more children who would be rejuvenating the culture. That might be the end of history.
Human nature doesn’t change.
Arminius:
Well, I can tell you that it is a “Heaven” scenario, not a “Hell”.
And the reason is simply that a part of the activity going on involves inspiring the joy of attending to things that are of actual need. By that means, not only does the person (or whatever) maintain eternal existence, but also enjoys doing so; ie. “Heaven”. The only problem in the past was understanding what really is of actual need. But that isn’t an issue anymore.
So the Eternal Hell scenario is out.
The other option is the Abyss, wherein everything gets totally lost, as in perhaps that “Black-hole” scenario.
Are you not afraid of the „Last Men“ (Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche), or of scenarios which are similar to some written stories, for example by Herbert George Wells, Aldous Huxley, or George Orwell?
Transhumanism essentially means the end of social organization so there’s that also and I definitely would classify that as the end of human history.
Observer:
So, for you Golem is the representative idea of Judaism…and christianity is not an outcrop of Judaism, mixed with parts of Hellenism?
The splintering of Judaism into, I think Straus put it this way, Religious Zionism (represented by the Orthodox Jew, still true to his chosen identifier), the Cultural Zionist (seeking to carry through with this decisiveness of being chosen but not in a final Armageddon, but in seclusion, in a nation State, contradicting the Wandering Jew identifier of world’s outsider. Here the meme seeks to become genetic), and the Cultural Zionist (the memetic form, wanting to eradicate all genetic and cultural distinctions so as to disappear within the multitudes).
Capitalism reduced man to a product, producer…and so does Marxism.
Jew as Banker.
Freud shames the Goyim, with expositions on his sexuality, leaving death on the side.
And what of Derrida?
You seem more interested in deciding what metaphors are more relevant than not.
The position is psychological.
A relationship between man and nature, his own and the cosmos.
It doesn’t matter what name you put on the attitude, what people become its representative group, it’s the attitude that contrasts with the pagan, Hellenic one.
The symbiotic relationship between human beings and nature was effectively destroyed with the birth of civilization.
As I view it the last man is one that has all of his humanity, freedom, independence, and individuality stripped from him within the oppressive artificial confines of civilization overtime.
There will come a time in the not too distant future where an advanced technological artificial civilization will do just that especially with the emergence of the technological singularity known as A.I.
History is built upon the presumption of progressivism.
finishedman:
All you have to do is understand the way your own individual personal past operates. The past is always active. If the past ends, you end. That is the reason why you will never allow that, no matter how hard you try. The past is everywhere in you. Every cell in your body is permeated by it. Every nerve is involved in it. The past has this body so much under control that it will not let it go. The past will not come to an end through any effort you make or whatever will power you effect! The more effort you put into it, the more willpower you use, the stronger it becomes. You came across many insights in this process, but every insight reinforces the past. It does not in any way help to understand anything and to thus free yourself from whatever. Every insight that you obtain with your investigations only strengthens and solidifies that.
The past and present are human constructs. Instead there is only the present reality of what is…
finishedman:
No, I’m saying people subjectively make up stories by the linking up of certain past events to create their philosophy or life narrative. They do it so as to not lose identity as time goes on. They don’t allow for events to stand alone independent of any other events. And I agree it is not necessary.
The guiding influence of all that is authority or government controlling the metanarrative public perception especially in terms of history since both write it for the rest of us.