I am now connecting the 21st century to geographic regions.
I have begun connecting social mechanics to biographies. This is where the “great men” meet the “social forces”, and where I consider the innovators and destroyers, the movers and shakers and their influence on society (and vice versa).
Although I would like to give more attention to the details of social mechanics, that is to say social changes, social types, and social structure, I feel obliged to give attention to Asiatic, African, and American Indian cities and communities first.
I am starting to connect specific biographies to religion. Among figures born in the 19th century, I want to take note of specifically Charles Darwin and Karl Marx. Although Darwin was primarily a biologist, his rejection of the idea of divine special creation of living things has become a cornerstone of atheistic secular thought. Although there are many who see the traditional religious account and the evolutionary account of the origin of life as compatible, there are also many do not. Marx was an atheist and hostile to religion, and his ideas have also become intertwined with modern atheistic secularism. I intend to consider these in more detail when I get around to secularism as a quasi-religious tradition and its development in modern history.
No, not the “Magnificent Seven”, the 1960 Western film (which I have still never seen), but the top seven subjects I am chewing through at the moment. I identified them in my last post, except that connecting cities to biographies is complete, so connecting economics to culture has moved up the list.
I have added Tomas Edison to the list of historical figures I am considering.
I am currently connecting religion to historical figures. Although each of these figures have some connection to religion, some of them are more prominent because of their connection to religion than for other reasons. I can’t really be more specific until I have better connection to particular religions.
The major divisions of history are just about fully developed. For the future, I am connecting to biographies. This is one of the difficult things about examining the future. It is next to impossible to predict the careers or influence of peoples not yet born. I don’t entirely agree with the “Great man” theory of history; that is, that the course of human events is determined by prominent figures. Nor do entirely agree with the “social forces” theory, that is, that the course of events is determined by large scale social movements. Rather, these are intertwined. Particular individual do sometimes have outsized influence on whole societies, but to some extent, this influence is a manifestation of greater social forces, and the individuals are to some extent riding a wave.
In either case, once I get this finished, the next target is the 21st century. I am still making connections to culture here,
Sociology and peoples of the world are developed pretty much as far as I can take them for now. Western civilization is being connected to culture. Communities are being connected to biographies, and social mechanics is about to start connections to human geography.
Institutions in general are developed about as far as I can take them. Religion is being connected to human geography, and government and economics to elements of culture.
I admit that all this still isn’t very interesting until I get to more detail of particular individuals.
I am reluctantly giving up on my efforts to begin at the beginning in my study of history. It is proving far more productive to examine the present and work back. One of the obstacles I mentioned is down; I have managed to fully separate the 21st century from the 20th. I have also managed to advance the early mid 21st century past the early 21st century, as far as connections to the lower levels of anthropology, personal studies, and science. For higher level connections, it remains to be seen. The next obstacle is to more fully develop and connect the early 2020s. There is not a great deal of content in this yet, but it will make analysis of current events easier for the next four and a half years.
This doesn’t mean I am abandoning work on earlier periods entirely. Classical and medieval history is connecting to specific individuals, antiquity is connecting to regions of human geography, and prehistory in general, I am now connecting to specific areas of technology. Since the study of prehistory depends on archaeology anyway, and archaeology depends heavily on the study of excavated artifacts, a focus on material culture is even more appropriate than it is for later periods.
For history in general, It seems to be most useful to develop science, so I am starting to resume the examinations I have set aside. There is also a need to add more biographies in order to fill in the picture somewhat.
Every once or twice in a while I find the lack of development in one area of my knowledge base hinders development of another, so I have to shift my efforts until the obstacle is cleared. Right now there are three.
I have not yet connected the broad area of culture to human geography. Many of the elements of culture, such as customs, language, or technology depend on the resources of a particular area, so it is important to make the connections explicit.
The broad area of institutions is connected to biographies. I have so far identified 25 biographical figures I am connecting.
I noted at the beginning of the year that it coincided with a new 5 year period, a new 20 year period, and the need to separate the 20th century from the 21st century. This last separation is incomplete, and it’s causing some difficulty as I get late medieval history better connected to divisions of what I call anthropology. This is a temporary difficulty to be sure, but it is one I still need to work on.
And, speaking of divisions of history, although these are artificial, I have compared them to topographic contour lines on a map, which leads me to mention my cartography projects. There are about three of these still in progress at various stages. I had begun a Mercator globe style map of the entire earth, which I have set aside as incomplete. The Africa map I posed last time could possibly use a few tweaks. I am working on a similar one with more detail focused on East Africa, another similar one focused on Southern Africa, and I am seriously considering starting a new one of the Middle East.
My latest attempt to use my knowledge base to advance my fictional story showed quite clearly that I have been concentrating on history and nations to the neglect of other areas of knowledge. My cartography efforts haven’t yet extended to cities. As I considered beginning such as project, I noted a severe lack of connection to the activities of society and the various features and facilities that support them. That means redirecting my emphasis, again.
I had mentioned that for history in general, I had reached the point of considering biographies. After postponing this, I have begun slowly adding a few more references to particular individuals.
Peoples of the world are being connected to regions of human geography. Although institutions are being connected to regions of human geography. Although there is some overlap between the topics, the emphasis of peoples of the world is on racial or ethnic groups wherever they live, while the emphasis of human geography is on places, whoever lives there, and I find it useful to make the distinction and the connections between them explicit. I am also connecting institutions to human geography, so I can eventually do things like map religious influence, political entities, and economic markets.
There are several areas, specifically antiquity, classical and medieval history, communities, and religion that are being connected to elements of culture.
I am also connecting several other areas to economics and education. I haven’t quite made it to specific firms or schools, but that’s on the list of goals and I am getting closer to doing that.
I’ve posted it in several other areas, but here is my first effort reasonably completed map in my cartography project.