I think... the history of civilization is an attempt to codify, classify and categorize aspects of human nature that hardly lend themselves to that process.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It is the recognition of history as a record of human experience which has inevitably resulted in the inclusion of this conquest of civilization within the framework of a complete human history.
The very concept of history implies the scholar and the reader. Without a generation of civilized people to study history, to preserve its records, to absorb its lessons and relate them to its own problems, history, too, would lose its meaning.
Civilization is the making of civil persons.
History is, of course, a made thing. It does not exist by itself in anything like a recognizable form.
You have to look at history as an evolution of society.
History is merciless. History doesn't care if we pound our society down a rat hole. It's up to us to make more intelligent choices about how we live!
History is, strictly speaking, the study of questions; the study of answers belongs to anthropology and sociology.
There is no history of mankind, there are only many histories of all kinds of aspects of human life. And one of these is the history of political power. This is elevated into the history of the world.
I think the materialist conception of history is valid.
The history of mankind is the history of ideas.