In earlier writings, we have expressed our emphatic objections in principle, to the use of and reliance on popular, “wise” sayings, purporting to instruct proper or effective action or encourage restraint. We have opposed reliance on such time-worn, misleading, behavioral guides since they assert their ubiquitous propriety in any and all situations and are veritable dogmatic, cookie-cutter declarations that make no allowance for nuance or situational variation.
A strikingly, instructive example is the retrogressive, admonition: “Stuff a cold and starve a fever.” The latter advice is empirically erroneous; moreover, it is factually, a corruption of the earlier and similarly, erroneous, chestnut: “If you starve a cold, you will starve a fever.” Another specimen derived from the vast universe of useless, or, misleading, advice, is the following sophomoric meme: “An apple a day, keeps the doctor away.” By thematic contrast, we always have encouraged, instead, the pragmatic process of rational deliberation relevant to the specific parties or situation.
In this context, our readings of Man’s past history, instructively, have led us to reject the thematic, universally time-worn, admonition: “Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.” It is our personally nuanced view and present theme, that the, widely enunciated, instructive statement, (attributed to the famous philosopher, George Santayana) and universally accepted, as constituting prudent and rational advice, when considered empirically and logically, should be seen as entirely, useless and, merely, “aphoristic.”
We, certainly, would never discourage the individual from the vital and salutary dedication to study and advancement by the acquisition of knowledge in the scholastic discipline of history (as well as other areas, including the Liberal Arts and Humanities). What we maintain, thematically, is that “knowledge” of Man’s history (as prescribed as a panacea, by Santayana) has never observably, resulted in the reduction or amelioration of conflict, the lessening of aggressive xenophobia, or the desired promotion of brotherhood and peace.
The popularly, communicated statement, like other aphoristic utterances, relies upon certain subjective assumptions and, in this case, is no less than Pollyannaish. The implicit assumption seems to be that knowledge of historical error would necessarily, elicit a universal ameliorative response. It may be presumptuous for us, uniquely to deride a reputed great philosopher like Santayana, but what experiential showing can he (or the universal purveyors of that empirically, disproved declaration) demonstrate that it amounts to more than hopeful aspiration. Does it appear rational to aphoristically, declare that awareness of past misdeeds, will ensure their non-replication? One must, instead productively grapple with the nature of humanity to effectively alter, and not merely be “aware” of its horrific behavior, beginning with the apocryphal tale of Cain and Abel to today’s reality of the immoral military attacks on Israel and Ukraine.
In point of fact, the (recommended) study and consideration of Man’s history, has gone back to the 5th Century, scholarly Greek historians, Herodotus and Thucydides, and has uninterruptedly, continued to be conducted date. It may, be noted that there, concomitantly, has existed the infamous history of warfare, xenophobia, racial and religious prejudice, crime and punishment, political corruption, autocratic rule and class abuse, poverty and greed, disloyalty and injustice. Santana’s recommended solution, viz., “Awareness of the Past,” is lightyears removed from the amelioration of Humanity’s proclivity to war and violence, extant injustice, and the aspiration for a just human society.
Unhappily, history (and pre-history) reveals Man’s nuanced and unpredictable capacity to be cruel and at times, empathic, warlike or quietly peaceful, loving or hateful, corrupt or honest, wise or ignorant, charitable or self-centered. Thus, we would, humbly, have urged the eminent, Mr. Santayana, if he were still with us, that in our view, the dedicated study of the dynamics of Humankind’s convoluted psyche would serve a more utilitarian purpose than the mere, perusal and awareness of his past, sordid behavior.
-p.
plinyblogdotcom 