Criticism of Historical Inevitability Whatever the way these...

Criticism of Historical Inevitability Whatever the way these material inevitabilities follow to interpret history, some of them proved righteous and others proved wrong, regardless of their scrupulous details. Righteousness lies in the fact that these theories dedicate history to some scientific laws, causes, and reasons that dictate its movement.

A historical event – similar to any other phenomenon in the universe - is conditioned to its causes and reasons, therefore casualty law governs historical events the way it governs the physical, chemical, mechanical phenomena, accurately reigning over all their familiar reasonable essentials like, inevitability, originality and so on.

This is righteousness, which can never be suspected, except in the Marxist theory, which fundamentally rejects casualty law replacing it with Dialectical Materialism, which has been extracted from (Hegel). The wrong aspect of these theories lies in negating man and his independent decision that makes history, considering him a piece of wood floating on the ever flowing waves of history; determining only one destiny for history and man, a destiny that never multiplies or shifts.

Certainly, this is wrong, for man (the individual, society, history) is not conditioned to one cause as a choice, rather he is usually conditioned to fall on a cross way; selecting the right way is related to his will, consciousness, culture and to his own decision to a great extent; so if ever he follows one of these ways according to his own will, decision and opinion he would find no way to get rid of compulsory impacts dictated on him by casualty law.

Let us state two examples for this, the first concerns the individual; and the other pertains to society. In regard to the example of the individual; if ever he moves, activates himself, and learns he will see his way in life; on the other hand, if ever he idles residing to ignorance and laziness he will remain minor, weak, worthless and powerless in life. Both results are conclusive and inevitable if ever man chooses the right way to attain them.

But it does not mean that man faces a one-dimensional inevitable (destiny and fate) in his life. In the example of society, a society that resists, makes sacrifices, endures the agony of confrontation and the severity of resistance, it will definitely come safe out of oppression, political suppression and terrorism.