Our Insignificance: Using Historical Method

We are insignificant creatures.

The evolution of modern human beings stretches back into our planets past a mere 250 million years; an insignificant scratch on the Earth's surface when we consider that life began some 3.85 billion years ago on a planet that is some 4 billion years old. But before we become lost in the minutiae of discussing ancient bacterial life with the human genesis that we are a direct descendant of today let us consider the paradox of time that for the most part eludes human consciousness concerning origins viewed from the panorama of Earth's incomprehensible length of history.

What I am alluding to is of course the recognition of geological or deep time which has washed over humankind's significance in the universe like a giant wave that powerfully sweeps across and engulfs an island bound piece of land. The impact of the discovery of deep time initiated the dethronement of God from the center of the universe. With God gone, man stood alone to understand and create humanity's place in the universe. And it created a secular consciousness in the minds of human beings that forced our species to acknowledge responsibility for what takes place in the course of human affairs and events and place it squarely on the shoulders of humankind. Simultaneously we became a happenstance creation in an infinite universe with the handicap of only being able to represent reality by rounding off the edges, seeking out the longue durée, and confronting the problems associated with our biased perceptions of all that is etched on our consciousness.

The problem, of course, with having such ultimate powers of representation is that we are forced to draw a comprehensible explanation which our senses relate to us and then explain that perception to fellow human beings. For those who try to walk the tightrope of representation; they must deal with the foibles of their own abilities to represent a reality that is struck between their own significance and insignificance as mortal beings. It is inevitable that self-doubt permeates our self confidence.

The significance of this observation is that we as observers cannot escape drawing conclusions from what we are focused on. And while we are focused on our observations, we might as well approach them in a systematic manner. And don't forget, human beings, although making observations of current, complex phenomena are doing so with brains that are no different in composition from those of our ancestors of some five thousand years ago.

The answer to our individual shortcomings is to widen our range of collective experiences to extend beyond that which an individual can take in and encounter by using the experiences of others who have confronted comparable instances in the past with the theory being that by taking such an approach, humanity's chances of drawing conclusions with greater wisdom would increase proportionately.

But what of other methods of observation including religion, culture, tradition, environment, and technology? Isn't historical observation lacking in responsiveness and authority when compared to these other areas of human endeavors? The problem is disputed easily when one considers that religion and culture are so dominated and answerable to orthodoxies, while human beings are highly adaptable creatures and make technology and environment less dependable as markers of human activities. Finally, traditions exist as manifestations without any solid consistency. This leaves historians with the sole task of providing interpretations of the past from the present to shape the course of the future. But do not let us venture too far afield: Studying the past guarantees no sure method of predicting the future. All that history can hope to accomplish is to prepare humanity for an uncertain future contained within certain bounds of past familiarities and humanizes the vagaries of deep time upon human consciousness and it's limitations.