July 7, 2024
By Bill Faw
Good morning! This is my 14th message for HUU since September, 2018. Today we look at the interesting question: Is history flat (basically staying the same), circular (getting better, then worse, in cycles), inclining (getting better), or declining (getting worse)?
PARTS ONE AND TWO: HISTORY FLAT AND/OR CIRCULAR
For classic portrayals of both the ‘flat’ and ‘circular/cyclical’ views of history, let us turn to good old Ecclesiastes from the Hebrew Bible, from 2400 or so years ago.
I invite you to join me in dramatically reading outload, together, the grand poetic words on the back of our OOS, the top half, from Ecclesiastes Chapter 1, proclaiming that History is flat and unchanging. I’ll read the first verse and then you join in.
Ecclesiastes 1:1-10:
The words of the Teacher the son of David, king in Jerusalem.
Vanity of vanities, says the Teacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity.
What do people gain from all the toil at which they toil under the sun?
A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever.
The sun rises and the sun goes down, and hurries to the place where it rises.
The wind blows to the south, and goes around to the north; round and round goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns.
All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they continue to flow….
What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there a thing of which it is said, “See, this is new”? It has already been, in the ages before us.
Hmm! Nothing new under the sun, what has been done is what will be done. History does not improve or get worse. It is flat as a pancake. But this means there is no hope for improving things:
“What do mortals get from all the toil and strain with which they toil under the sun? For all their days are full of pain and their work is a vexation; even at night their minds do not rest. This also is vanity.”
And even the rare person with Ecclesiastes’ wealth and education has little hope: “I applied my mind to know wisdom and to know madness and folly. I perceived that this also is a chasing after wind.”
But for this cynical philosopher, there are fleeting moments of hope which are quickly dashed, for each of our lives has cycles from our time to be born to our time to die; and history, itself, has the cycles of times of war and times of peace.
So, now let us read together again, dramatically, from Ecclesiastes 3 about the personal, societal, and historical cycles.
Ecclesiastes 3:1-8: (let’s kind of go up and down in cycles…)
1 For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:
2 a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;
3 a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
4 a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
5 a time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time
to refrain from embracing;
6 a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to throw away;
7 a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
8 a time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace.
The great 1965 musical rendition of this, ‘Turn! Turn! Turn!, by Pete Seger, The Byrds, and others – in the midst of the turmoil of the Vietnam War – breaks the cycle at the end by singing:
A time to rend, a time to sew
A time for love, a time for hate
A time for peace, I swear it’s not too late
But for Ecclesiastes, himself, the times of peace would soon be swallowed up by more times of war! History ultimately stays the same (“nothing new under the sun”) but it is filled with times of healing, building up, love, and peace – followed inevitably by killing, tearing down, hate and war. Since time marches forward, these cycles would look like waves up and down.
The best we can do, wrote Ecclesiastes in later chapters, is to “eat, drink, and be merry” and to revere God and keep God’s commandments. Thank God, there is at least some solace in his cynicism. But not much solace, since his ‘God’ could not do anything.
Theories of “The Rise and Fall of Civilizations” are later more sophisticated theories of history as circular/cyclical.
But wait, before we move on to other philosophies of history, such as history inclining or declining, we need to address a nagging thought that is probably in your mind.
Why are we even talking about ‘philosophies’ of history? Isn’t ‘history’ just one damn thing after another? – a catch phrase for everything that has happened in human culture? Isn’t “flat” or “incoherent” the only scientific, or at least the most scientific view of history?
But, consider that a view of history as flat or incoherent or even cyclical, is, itself, a ‘view’, a ‘philosophy’ of history. The view of history as flat or incoherent is by no means the only obvious or scientific view.
PART THREE: HISTORY INCLINING: BENDING UPWARD
So let’s boldly move on. Maybe Ecclesiastes was too pessimistic. Maybe there are new things under the sun – perhaps even some better things. As in some of my earlier messages here, I draw, upon Unitarian pastor and anti-slavery crusader, Theodore Parker, and his 1853 sermon quote about the “arc of the moral universe”, as representing a classic example of a philosophy of history “inclining”:
“I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one, my eye reaches but little ways; I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by the experience of sight; I can divine it by conscience. And from what I see I am sure it bends towards justice”.
Apropos to last Thursday, Parker cited the U.S. Declaration of Independence as part of his evidence that the moral universe bends toward justice. For Theodore Parker, history is getting better; but by no means in a straight upward line. It is more like Hwy W-33 right outside our door – heading toward W. Va., with an overall gradual climb, but with many ups and downs and zigs and zags along the way – cycles/waves within an upward incline!
And long before Theodore Parker – and even before Ecclesiastes — the Biblical Hebrew prophets had a version of that: by proclaiming that God demands and works toward justice in history: God’s providence.
And, probably most progressives working toward peace and justice issues today see history ascending – or at least potentially ascending — gradually. In fact, the term “progressive” implies some sort of historical ‘progress’. Martin Luther King linked his assurance that “we shall overcome” to Theodore Parker’s justice-bend of the arc of the universe.
All of this ultimate optimism raises the important question: who or what bends it — humans or God or basic evolutionary forces or some combination?
PART FOUR: HISTORY DECLINING
But, what if Ecclesiastes was actually an optimist. What if history is actually getting worse and worse? There are several current versions of views of history declining, getting worse; some by religious or cultural conservatives, and others by progressives.
Many conservative Christians view history as being under the control of the devil and going downhill to hell in a handbasket. Just hold on through all the injustice and suffering of history, until the end times. Then and then alone will there be peace and justice. Those folks are not the ones who are singing: “Let there peace on earth, and let it begin with me.” So, type 1: history going to literal hell.
A much more active form of ‘history declining’ is found in White Christian Nationalism – which we will deal with in 3 CLA sessions in a couple months. For them the 1950s was a golden age, with dramatic declines from then to now in the percentage of Americans identifying as Christian and in the percentage of non-Hispanic white residents; as well as considerable differences in the self-dignity and standings of Blacks, women, and LGBTQ persons. So, type 2: for white Christian nationalists history is going to social and political hell.
But, it is not only conservatives who see history declining. We see at least two major groups of progressives who see that.
One progressive group views current threats to democracy and human rights as signaling a down-turn of history. The high point for the number and quality of democracy countries in the world was at a high point in about 2006. Now we are at a much lower point – fewer and more fragile democracies. Events in the U.S. and France show that downturn.
A second progressive group of ‘history-decliners’ are convinced that major thresholds of climate change have already passed and cannot be reversed, leaving us with an “unsustainable biosphere”. Many of us, here, saw the video by Michael Dowd at the June 2nd HUU service., 5 weeks ago. Dowd represented an extreme form of this history declining view along with a cyclical view of the rise and fall of civilizations; with our civilization being in its ‘contractive’, declining period – perhaps leading to the overall fall of human civilization, of history.
Some progressives see the decline in ‘history’ as beginning from the time of the industrial revolution, when we started using up and spoiling the rest of nature. Some others go much earlier: with the rise of homo sapiens hunters killing off many other species.
PART FIVE: HOW DO WE CHOOSE BETWEEN PHILOSOPIES OF HISTORY?
You, you, and you probably have an unspoken philosophy of history! Your own view of the flatness or bend of history derives from several things:
a) your basic philosophy or faith stance (such as is there some divine or special evolutionary force which helps direct history?),
b) your view of human nature (are we basically good, basically bad, or a neutral mixture?),
and c) your analysis of historical trends – especially over long stretches, such as changes from Theodore Parker’s day with legalized slavery and perhaps only one world democracy, compared to today.
These three factors are involved not only if you have an ‘’inclining’ view of history like Parker, but also if you see history as flat and unchanging, as circular, or as declining.
I have spoken here and written in the newspaper – some – about my own personal wider philosophy and faith stance, my psychological insights into human nature, and my reading of the sweep of history.
But, instead of making this speech any longer by sharing my tentative evaluation of this, I would like the challenge of developing this into a full message – to be given sometime later this year, when I’m ready to give it, and you’re ready to hear it. I will include in my message-preparation, spending serious time with Michael Dowd’s postdoom.com website.
Meanwhile, thank you for this opportunity. Do we have time for questions and comments?