Learning from History

There’s that famous saying about those who never learn from history. But is it even possible to learn from history? Or is it an impossible goal altogether?

Part of it has, of course, to do with ego. Who really thinks that they are embarking on a course of action that has already been attempted, and failed at, for the exact same reasons? Also known as the I-am-smarter-I-am-stronger feeling. Besides, just because the last guy got burnt at something doesn’t mean the next guy can’t succeed at it, right?

Then there’s the difference between history and science. Or to put it differently, life isn’t a lab experiment, and no two situations are exactly the same. As Michael Mauboussin pointed out:

“The challenge with history, however, is that it’s a very fickle teacher. Which is a lot of the key to understanding history is what the circumstances were.”

Assessing the circumstances is a subjective choice; you can either willfully ignore things based on your view or often, not even be aware of all the circumstances. Besides, can one truly know all the circumstances or weigh them properly?

Yet another problem is that history is written by the victors, so how do you really know whether what you read is right or not?

Lastly, ever notice how history always reads like a story book? With a clear beginning, a turning point in between before the end where miraculously, the good guys always win? That’s not entirely because it was written by the victors. It’s also because humans like explanations, a cause and effect relationship between events. And so we tend “to emphasize simple, linear determinism over complexity, randomness, and ambiguity”. It’s what’s called the “narrative fallacy”. Don’t believe me? Then watch Troy, the movie. The way they tell it at school, it was all about Helen. Watch the movie and you find each participant has his own reasons for joining the war, and only the former hubby did it for Helen!