Does history repeat itself?

>>1503668
>Does history repeat itself?
What do you mean?

I have dropped multiple balls in my life. Have I dropped the exact same ball in the exact relative moment before?

Well that's impossible.

>>1503668
Yes. Take the redpill and read Oswald Spengler.

>>1503668
No, just rhymes

>hey let's invite these assholes to come fight for us! what could go wrong?

File: FINISHED.png (332KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 640x480px

No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.

>>1503696
Yes, yes. Very well Heraclitus, very well. HOWEVER

considering our human nature, aren't we bound to repeat the same mistakes and make the same decisions over and over again?

If we look at communities of other animals throughout their generations, they always end up living the same lives. They will respond to the environment the same way their ancestors would. And so they live and reproduce, for thousands of years, repeating the same patterns of behavior again and again.

Now consider humanity. We are animals, after all. Sure, the patterns of our behavior are much more complex given our intelligence, but nevertheless, we are still bound by our own nature.

yes but first as tragedy, then as farce

>>1503730
>we are still bound by our own nature
Wrong.

Evidence : Suicide. We exist outside the bounds of nature as you apply to other animals due to our intelligence. We are capable of denying ourselves that which we covet simply for the sake of denying it.

>If we look at communities of other animals throughout their generations, they always end up living the same lives. They will respond to the environment the same way their ancestors would. And so they live and reproduce, for thousands of years, repeating the same patterns of behavior again and again.

What are you even trying to say? It's also wrong. Monkeys use tools which means they have learnt somewhere and are able to pass on their learning to future generations thus changing the cycle.

This quote is the most retarded thing I have ever read and it's ignorance incarnate. Simply by looking at history and seeing that we are making the same mistakes disproves it's validity. Unless of course you think the world leaders are ignorant in our history.

I mean sure, if you want to break everything own into it's ideologies we are doing the same thing over and over - searching for survival. What survival means and how to attain it is a dynamic adventure.

>>1503682

t. Papadapolous

>>1503794
>We are capable of denying ourselves that which we covet simply for the sake of denying it.
>a am who does not covet death commits suicide for no reason but to deny himself life
Example please.

>>1503859
>Example please.
Are you hungry? Don't eat. Do you honestly believe animals are capable of making that decision? For the sole purpose of it?

>attempting to deny such a basic idea of human ideology
What the fuck is wrong with you? We are sentient we are capable of meta-cognition.

You're an idiot.

File: 1467347404491.png (392KB, 640x478px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 640x478px

>>1503668
ask this guy

>>1503668
To answer your question that isn't poetic drivel, history doesn't truly "repeat" itself. But patterns do emerge and similar causations for past events can be recreated and lead to an effect nearing the previously observed one.

This is because our capacity for rational thought has remained the same since the inception of the first advanced civilizations. Of course there have been revolutions since then that organized and improved the formulation and implications of rational thought, but that revolution didn't affect the masses or politicians as much as it did with scholars. This meant that the basic reactions to basic events hasn't changed.

Also no matter what the time period our needs/wants have remained the same. We require food, shelter, water, security, sex, and power.

Thus if our thoughts are the same and our needs/wants are the same, then roughly the events in acquiring or securing these needs/wants should be roughly the same.

For example war up until the present has always ultimately about the acquisition or maintaining of power. This hasn't changed and will possibly never change unless technological innovations make the act of war obsolete to attain/maintain our needs/wants.

>"anon, it's time to learn about this random faggot from 1876"
>"why?"
>"history is important, we need to know this stuff so it doesn't get repeated"
>still does

top kek

yes, I have began thinking that history moves in cycles

>>1503794
>We exist outside the bounds of nature as you apply to other animals due to our intelligence
how is this possible though? why would our intelligence enable us to transcend our own nature, if it is by this nature that we are intelligent in the first place? can a computer do things that it was not programmed to do?

>Monkeys use tools which means they have learnt somewhere and are able to pass on their learning to future generations thus changing the cycle.
does new technology really make a difference? an ape can kill with his bare hands, or with a chiseled rock made for the purpose of killing easier. technology is really just an extension of our bodies. it is an ability we have given our nature. lets pretend that we find a colony of stone age people. I think we can say without a doubt that they will invent their own technology. it might not be exactly the same as ours, but it will serve the same functions that we invented our technologies for. if condition A led us to invent some new technology, then condition A will lead these people to do the same thing. this is just one way to show how history can repeat itself.

>Simply by looking at history and seeing that we are making the same mistakes disproves it's validity
it's just our superior ability to learn and see larger patterns that allows us to spot these mistakes. but animals do this all the time, just not to the same degree. animals constantly learn from their mistakes. my point is that no matter how much they learn, they are still bound by their own nature to make the same decisions, given the same conditions.