I don’t think human nature changes, if you prescribe to a natural law view of the world, which I would define as a set of principles that guide human nature to flourish, and, when broken, to despair. I think the fact that there are principles that do not change—even though much changes on the surface—is part of what makes history worthy of study and also fascinating. I’d be curious if you agree with this, Mr. Brands, if you have the time!
"The twentieth century invented human rights as an operative concept. Anyone alive five hundred years earlier would have considered the idea fatuous." After Dr. Brands, my favorite historian is the Brit Dan Jones. He and Brands are similar in that both are first-rate historians, but they write so that the non-specialist can enjoy their excellent histories and biographies. I just finished Jones' new and excellent biography of Henry V. Jones points out (as does Brands) that earlier centuries had no concept of the term "war crimes." As did the ancient Hebrews in the Middle East, Henry took no prisoners when he captured a French city.
I don’t think human nature changes, if you prescribe to a natural law view of the world, which I would define as a set of principles that guide human nature to flourish, and, when broken, to despair. I think the fact that there are principles that do not change—even though much changes on the surface—is part of what makes history worthy of study and also fascinating. I’d be curious if you agree with this, Mr. Brands, if you have the time!
This sounds like a question that deserves a whole essay. Let me give it some thought.
"The twentieth century invented human rights as an operative concept. Anyone alive five hundred years earlier would have considered the idea fatuous." After Dr. Brands, my favorite historian is the Brit Dan Jones. He and Brands are similar in that both are first-rate historians, but they write so that the non-specialist can enjoy their excellent histories and biographies. I just finished Jones' new and excellent biography of Henry V. Jones points out (as does Brands) that earlier centuries had no concept of the term "war crimes." As did the ancient Hebrews in the Middle East, Henry took no prisoners when he captured a French city.