Do_Individuals_Change_the_Course_of_History,_or_Is_Change_the_Product_of_Larger_Historical_Forces__Support_Your_Argument_with_Historical_Examples.

Do individuals change the course of history, or is change the product of larger historical forces' Support your argument with historical examples. Historical change is the outcome of a phase of change within a society. Individuals influence this phase through their actions; yet these actions are pre-determined by their experiences which they themselves had no control over. Historical change requires a permitting environment in which to influence; an environment where a majority must be knowingly affected by an individual, meaning individuals are under the constraints of historical forces. Power defines opportunities for change, a requirement where all aspects are founded on society. Outstanding figures frequent these time periods, however, society dominates the nature and constraints of these individuals, the influence of these characters on history the products of larger historical forces themselves. An individual’s environment will inevitably define their experiences, the major influencing factor of an individual’s actions or decisions—an influence which cannot be genuinely shaped by the individual. People are born without any choice in their birth circumstances, their environment. Therefore, experiences gained within this environment are influenced by factors outside an individual’s control, meaning that an individual’s knowledge and understanding have been at least partly, if not solely, founded on uncontrollable influences. Decisions are influenced by prior experiences (from any indefinite amount of time past) that have been shaped by an environment out of an individual’s control. Genuine decisions, however, are made without the constraints of these influences—a non-existent aspect concerning decision-making. This can be demonstrated with the case of Adolf Hitler. Substantial evidence has been found stating that Hitler’s anti-Semitic prejudices stemmed from personal observation and reasoning (Mein Kampf 1942; Anti-Semitism 2001), observations that he himself didn’t impact. Hitler’s anti-Semitic biases emerged gradually through multiple observations with Jewish Zionists, conforming to evidence Hitler perceived (concerning propagated media within Vienna) that Jewish Zionism was morally unjustifiable towards personal beliefs (Mein Kampf 1942). Bias observations developed regarding Jewish culture, justifying his views of Judaism the race, not the religion: “Was there any shady undertaking, any form of foulness, especially in cultural life, in which at least one Jew did not participate'” (Hitler, A 1925, Mein Kampf, p. 153). Hitler’s situation was one he himself had no bearing on whatsoever; based on observations, Hitler’s flawed reasoning (flawed due to gradual bias) determined his comparably immoral beliefs, with similar cases such as his approval of eugenics (Richard Weikart, 2001), etc. Hitler’s story demonstrates the lack of control an individual possesses concerning the surrounding environment’s influence on themselves. Validation is given to the pre-determination assertion that experiences, through external factors, influence an individual’s actions within a phase of change. Experiences are gained within an environment or society, further proof denying the claim that individuals change the course of history, rather than larger historical forces. Human nature possesses us to seek for personal benefit, attainable through the involvement of change. This applies nonetheless so on the scale of historical change, where an individual may influence change through their actions only if society permits; that is, if deviation from the norm knowingly affects a greater majority of that society. Einstein shares traits with the Spanish Inquisition in this manner: Einstein, through celebrated scientific success within the industrial era that would’ve been deemed blasphemous during the Spanish Inquisition; the latter’s executions of heretics and Einstein-like thinkers only possible with a supporting society (The Spanish Inquisition, 1996). Assuming a hypothetical situation of Einstein being executed by the Holy Tribunal, his theories would have followed his demise as blasphemous with no substantial impact on an un-permitting, unknowingly affected society. However, scientific ideologies deemed blasphemous by previous or existing societies may leave an extensive impression within an innovative secularised society, only if this approving society develops. This principle applies to other ideologies also (e.g. ethical, philosophical). Individuals are limited in their ability to influence change inside an un-permitting environment, and even if successful are ultimately tools of society themselves (see paragraph 2 for side proof). Societal constraints on individuals limit possible actions of historical change, meaning similar individuals’ ideological influences on change differ depending on society, which ultimately determines an individual’s actions’ success—bolstering the claim of change established by larger historical forces. Opportunities to influence change are developed through power. Individuals wield power; however, power is defined through larger historical forces. Power is any tool an individual may use to cause change, be it intelligence, wealth, military or any other advantageous, employable aspect of life. Prospects for power (prospects for stimulating change) are set through previous or existing societies, which outline the most effective form/s of power during the current time period. Once engaged, power influences historical change. In possession, however, power is the response to need for change. Usage is based on moral instincts instilled from past experiences (see paragraph 2 for side proof). Effects of using power vary depending on the society change is being implemented within. Therefore, all aspects of power, from acquisition opportunities to usage and results of usage, are determined by larger historical forces (Theories of Power, 2003). Supporting evidence comes in the form of Mother Teresa—renowned missionary. In impoverished societies, Mother Teresa’s most efficient forms of power were moral values, aiding need for change through usage for the elimination of poverty worldwide (Mother Teresa, 1998), effectively causing historical change by doing so. Reasoning behind Mother Teresa’s power usage came from moral instincts instilled through past experiences regarding religious faith (Mother Teresa, 1998). The efficiency of ‘moral values’ as a form of power within impoverished societies was due to the ongoing social situations (containing many reparable moral issues), described by Mother Teresa as “unwanting, unloving, terrifying” (Spink, K 1998, Mother Teresa: A Complete Authorized Biography, p. 116.) The Mother Teresa example shows that all of an individual’s power aspects are characterized directly on the basis of society. Individuals are once more subject to the inevitable truth—change is the product of larger historical forces. Ultimately, individuals and their actions influence historical change (the outcome of a change phase within a society)—actions which are pre-determined as the product of larger historical forces. The logical validity of individuals and their hold on their decisions is questionable; genuine decisions are unconstrained by uncontrollable influences, yet as shown through Hitler’s Jewish observations and flawed reasoning (Mein Kampf, 1942), genuine decision-making is logically impossible. Individuals may only change history if society permits, indicative of the ineffectiveness of an individual’s bid for influence on a change phase characterized by the given constraints of larger forces. Even if society approval does occur, a genuine influence cannot be in place based on the questionable decision-making ability of individuals without the aid of larger forces. Finally, change is only possible through opportunities presented concerning power, an aspect of life that is completely established from societal values, the products of larger forces. Historical change as created by the individual is impossible; larger historical forces pre-determine the constraints and nature of these individuals, meaning that change is dictated solely through the products of larger historical forces. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books – Two Authors | Author, | Init & | Author, | Init | Year, | Title, | Publisher, | Place. | Murphy | J & | Hitler, | A | 1942, | Mein Kampf, | CPA BOOK PUBLISHER, | Boring, Oregon. | Books – One Author | Author, | Initial | Year, | Title, | Publisher, | Place. | Hart, | M H | 1992, | The 100: A Ranking of The Most Influential Persons in History | Kensington Publishing Corp. | New York. | Spink, | K | 1998, | Mother Teresa: A Complete Authorized Biography, | Harper Collins, | New York. | Kamen | H | 1998 | The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision, | Yale University Press, | United States | Internet – no author | Title, | Year, | Retrieved day Month year, from | Ideas about power - Theories Of Power | 2003, | Retrieved 6 May 2012, from | | Internet | Author, | Init. | Year, | Title. | Retrieved day Month year, from | Hamann, | B. | — | Jews in Vienna. | Retrieved 6 May 2012, from | |