This is a topic about the usefulness/importance of knowing History in modern society.

If you think History is important, can you explain why you think so?

If you think History isn't important, can you explain why you think so?

I am not intending to post my own answer. This is just something I want to observe and maybe involve myself from time to time.

I am going to have a few guidelines. You don't have to worry about sticking to them, but it would be nice if you did.

• Please stay on topic. I know my way around the report button. I won't use it unless things are getting quite derailed though. I like a little derailment, as it helps me see where someone's mind is at, just don't get carried away please.
• Feel free to discuss relevant history, but try to avoid things that will incite a flame war.
• Understand that bias is inescapable and assume the other party is biased, you don't need to point it out. No one is unbiased. Try to recognize your own bias if possible. Especially if your bias is derived from bad sources. Such as your friend who once read a history book in 3rd grade and knows that Alexander Graham Bell the Great conquered the Persians.
• Provide evidence to disprove another person's ideas if possible. If not, discuss the evidence and try to provide sources for it.
• Be respectful, it will increase the likelihood of someone being sympathetic to your position.
• Try to keep your posts legible. Grammar is really important for promoting understanding in topics such as this. I am not going to come down on you for it, but for the sake of clarity in your own argument: proofread your posts.

Feel free to play Devil's Advocate.

History is important to understand where we came from. That's it. I don't mind history much, but only when I get to direct what I learn. Quite frankly, I don't give a flying hoot about cave paintings. They are cool and all, and if I were in the area, sure Id like to see them, but sitting in a classroom watching a 2 hour documentary on some cave paintings in france is boring as [censored]. In highschool I tested in the top 3% in the country for WW2 history. I like WW2 because I love technology, and WW2 was the driving force for basically everything we use today. However, I don't care about the misc tid-bits inbetween.

It is important to keep a record of history, but not so important to teach everything in schools.

In terms of the betterment of ourselves and the human race, I don't really think we can learn from it any more than any story (we are bound to repeat it no matter what we do), but I think it's important to preserve history simply for knowledge's sake.

Is it even useful to know where we came from? How does that benefit us as a society? Especially when you consider that the past is so often a cause for conflict.

Can you think of nothing else it is useful for?

What makes you think we are bound to repeat it? Many things have not been repeated and many things are simply not repeatable. Our technological growth ensures that things can't ever be the same way it was before does it not? It might end in a new spin on an old tale, but it still has changed.

Love, war, aggression, murder, genocide, poverty, injustice, want for power, etc... Those things don't go away with new technology. The human race is what it is. Slightly civilized and restrained, but basically instinctual apes. Knowing our history isn't going to change that. It'll make us more self aware, sure, but that won't bring about change.

History is useful because it grants us the ability to hold onto our heritage and our culture. All of the nations of this planet were forged in tradition, culture, and they are deep seeded in these things. Without history, those things lose their meaning, and in essence, we lose our identity as individuals within our nations.

There's a saying one of my old teachers from high school said. "If we don't know our history, we are bound to repeat it".

I think history is very important. Teaches and reminds us where we come from and why we hold certain traditions, why certain laws exist, etc. plus depending on the history you prefer, it can just be fascinating.

Those are very generalized things that take very different forms. Several of those things can reach a point where they are drastically reduced due to responsible use of technology and social change. Although technology can also drastically increase some of them. As we become more self aware, what happens if we use technology to limit these things that are both bad and in repetition and to increase those that are good and not?

Okay, I know I am getting to the point where I am the kid that keeps asking why, but what makes learning of our heritage, cultures and traditions important for individual identity? What makes individualism valuable to a society?

Short-term history is useful because it allows us to reflect on our society impartially, and use this viewpoint to progress. Long-term, for the most part we don't learn much. We can look back at slavery and say, "yep, slavery was bad. Let's not do that again", but that's not particularly useful. More useful is looking back to within our own lifetimes and those of our parents and grandparents, because we can relate to that: "Black people and women weren't allowed the vote? How disgusting! What other inequalities exist?" for instance. By taking a step back and reviewing our own society in relation to the recent past, we can see where we can improve.

History can also be useful for understanding current issues. For instance, if somebody knew nothing if history, the conflict in the Middle East, and the conflicts surrounding Israel, would be lost. And it's important to remember why these conflicts exist because, if it's forgotten, it could just become hate; a case of "I hate them because that's what I'm supposed to do" rather than "I'm told to hate them because of something that happened 3 decades ago, shouldn't we sort this out so we can move on and stop killing each other?". It helps to understand why much of Africa has the society that it does and that is key to developing a way of fixing it. It helps us understand some of the less-useful reasons for pro-Scottish independence and dismiss those. There are many examples.

It also helps us understand each other from a cultural point of view. Why are certain cultures in America, Africa and Australasia (and many other places, I'm certain) less affluent and why do they behave differently to me, with all of these strange customs? Without learning of the indigenous cultures and their exploitation and/or subjugation, it is difficult to relate to them and therefore those culture's position within their respective society's will be less likely to improve (I'm talking education, wealth, general opportunity). It doesn't stop at minority cultures either. History allows people from the UK to understand the social norms in different parts of the US and vice versa, for example.

I think history is important. The people giving advice, the people in charge, they must make world-changing decisions based on historical conflicts and historical cultural differences. We as individuals need to know a bit about history to be capable of making informed decisions when choosing which of those people should be in charge (let's not vote for another Adolf Hitler, for instance), and without knowing history, even just a little, we simply won't have the knowledge that will allow us to recognise those sorts of dangers.

I think history is more than just stories. History is more like the previous chapers of a story we are currently in. The stuff in those chapters are pretty important. History is, too.

Assuming by history you mean - as people usually do - human history (as opposed to, say, the history of the universe and the planets, or natural history - both of which are generally reserved for the study of the hard(er) sciences, and both of which are important for different reasons) then I think there are lots of reasons it is important.

At the most basic level, I think gathering knowledge about anything is a good thing. Sure, there are some things which some people would rather not know, but collectively I think society is a better place where more knowledge is available to more people. I suspect you're going to ask "why?" for that, too, but I don't have an answer for you other than to say that people (myself included) seem to prefer to know things than not to know them, and who am I to argue with that deep-seated feeling?

But that applies to any knowledge, not just history.

So I also think history is important because (as someone said above) stories are important to us - they help us understand the world and transfer our perspectives from one thing to another. Stories are an essential part of language, morality and thought, and since the history which we (as society) have access to is basically just a huge accumulation of different stories, it's important to preserve it in order to help preserve the breadth of possible thought which keeps life interesting.

But that applies to all stories, not just history.

So finally, I think history is important because it helps to give us an idea of where things in our world came from - and not just any things, but the things which it is most in our power to affect and change. Studying the history of the nation-state, for example, can show us not only how it came to be, but also why - what sort of impulses and thoughts led to the (more-or-less accidental) creation of a institution which we so take for granted that many people are unable to imagine it not existing. It can also show us that things don't have to be how they are - that there was a world, and civilisation, before some of the things which we see as so definitive of it now. It allows us to break open origin-myths, which are often used (wrongly) as justification for terrible things.


In addition to all that, there's also the fact that, whether or not you see history as important, other people definitely do. Insofar as history is just a collection of stories, it's nevertheless a collection of stories which are generally held to be "more true" than other stories (whether or not that is actually the case) and thus have a lot of intellectual weight. Cliché as it is, a comparison to Nazi Germany can do a lot of damage to the credibility of a political project, whereas a comparison to the dystopian regime of Final Fantasy VI probably wouldn't be taken as seriously. Of course there are other stories which, whilst not historical, probably do have as much weight (or more) than historical ones - Orwell's 1984 is an obvious example - but in general people are more convinced by a historical argument than a non-historical one. So in that sense, I guess I'm saying history is important simply because people see it as important.

History is the story of us. We didn't start as Human beings. However, you are right, the value of that kind of history is blatantly obvious. Knowing something like geologic history, allows us to predict and avoid major natural catastrophes, as well as a range of other benefits. This thread is about Human history since the early Civilizations created more complex societies.

You sort of gave it shortly thereafter.

Although I would amend that to say it is important to preserve this knowledge to increase our chance of surviving and thriving as a species. More knowledge creates more stories. Stories create more perspectives. More perspective creates more solutions. More solutions makes fewer or less arduous problems. Fewer and less arduous problems create a better society.

A good point. Although there are examples of quite old social norms that we could look to for solutions to current problems. Modern society likes to believe it is more enlightened and less barbaric than the past. However, sometimes our solutions are less effective than those that existed in the past.

It also is very important to not get attached to one period of history, as it isn't segmented. Which can be a big problem if you only study the short-term. If you just stopped looking for culprits for a modern problem three decades back, you could place blame on a group that doesn't deserve it. Creating a scapegoat and evading the truth. This will lead to more conflict as now there are two groups who feel wronged. The difference is in when and/or where they stopped looking for their scapegoat. The accuser goes thirty years back and the accused goes back eighty. History provides them justification for their conflict, just at different time periods.

We must know where we've been in order to know where we're going. It is important that we learn from the mistakes of our predecessors so that we do not make those mistakes again. And the creative inspiration is a pleasant bonus.

Speaking as someone who will spend hours reading history pages on wikipedia for fun, I don't really think leaning History is important. We can almost never use historical examples to make modern decisions for us, because the sort of decisions they had to make in the 12th century are very unlikely to compare to 21st century problems. Enthusiasm for history can even be harmful. I'm hitting myself with Godwin's law, but the Germans in WW2 used history as a jingoistic tool for nationalism by focusing on Germanic heroes like Charlemange and Frederick Barbarossa.

Art is a part of history, and the boobs are not censored

Well, we can learn a lot from the past. And it's a very interesting topic.

Also, those of you who have read 1984 understand why the past is important. If we don't know it, governments can flood us with lies if they were so inclined.

I'm paraphrasing here but history is important because, 'Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.'

I can go into many reasons why this is important but this thread would quickly turn political and I'm going to attempt avoiding this. If however you turn on the news you can see examples all over the world of tyrants who refuse to take notes from the past. I can point you to one individual in particular who seems to be ignoring history.

Our brains receive information that has traveled from events various space-time distances away, then it takes time to process it and generate a conscious experience of "the present". In fact all we know is "the past". Change in the time dimension only goes one way, of course. That's the way the energy potential tilts as things change. Complexity arises through feedback, the echoes get more complicated, we can see the fading influence of events long past. As entities who will not be stable forever, it's natural that they are precious to us.

Many great people may not have done their deeds if they knew they would never be remembered for them.

That's not a proven theory or even being discussed. Sounds like Scientology at worst or Pseudoscience at best.

I think History isn't terribly important for most people. After all, aside from personal interest, what practical use can a gas station cashier derive from knowing that Hannibal trashed the Roman army at Cannae? They can find it interesting, they can make it a hell of a hobby, but it's not important.

Now that I've said that, and going with what others have said, history is extremely important for providing context for the modern day. Without understanding history, a diplomat in Baghdad might not be able to understand why Shias and Sunnis keep killing one another, or you might wonder why the Abkhaz and Georgians just don't like one another. How could someone understand half of the things that Israel does without understanding Jewish history?

Basically, if you really want to know a man and do business with him, look at what's happened to him in his life. That builds him, shapes him, and influences his decisions. Once you know his story, you can estimate pretty reasonably how he'll react to certain things and just how far you can go. Nations are much the same way.

Other people have said it better, but there's my two cents.

Understanding how things became the way they are is a big step toward understanding why they became the way they are. Understanding why they became the way they are gives us tools to make better decisions that will affect the future, and the future is the thing that we can actually affect.

Like above, your average "man on the street" probably isn't going to need to know much about history to have an enjoyable life. But I'd say in all cases, it'd be a good thing to know - I was raised to believe all knowledge is itself worth knowing, and that includes history. On a person-to-person level, it's something where you're not a "bad" person for not knowing a lot about history or having much interest in it, but as a broad generalization I think it's fair to say the more you can learn about the past the more well-rounded and interesting you'll be.

And if you're an important person doing important things then I feel it would behoove that person to learn as much as possible about the context of the decisions they're making.

For humanity as a whole, I think obviously history is worth preserving and researching. I, myself, might not ever be an expert in any particular historical era, but it's good that someone is and that that knowledge is archived and researched. Kind of like, I might not ever read every book at my local library, but I think it's a good thing all those books are there, regardless.

Of course Alexander Graham Bell the Great conquered the Persians. His army had iPhones that they got from Aristevejobstle, while the Persians were still using outdated telegraph wires.

Nicely put.

Also, we grow by building on our experiences, both as individuals and as a society. If we ignored the experiences of those before us, we would have to start over from scratch at each new generation. Thus, we study history.

Just QFT and relativity, that's all I adhere to.

The problem with history is we can't know if anything is accurate the farther back we go.

That sentiment is true, but rather unhelpful. Thinking along those lines, we cannot be sure if anything is accurate beyond our own scope of personal experience, and due to the way our brains work, we cannot even be sure of that. Since our brains interpret everything, we are not actually capable of experiencing reality directly - unfiltered, so to speak. So, in one sense, if everything is merely an interpretation rather than a reality, then the historical traditions that have been passed down from person to person are more real than the actual events themselves, because the tradition is still alive in people's minds while the event is gone and cannot be revisited. But that leaves us hopelessly mired in philosophy, and no work gets done. So historians have to double-check everything where they can, and take the rest on faith until such a time as new evidence can come to light. Error is certainly unavoidable under such a system, but we also do get some work out of it, so it is a trade-off.