This is not surprising. Although we have experienced different times, we are endowed with the same cognitive method, that is, "historical determinism", because of the same environment. If we only distinguish from the above viewpoints, we are "anti-naturalistic historical determinists" The unity of general order in physics cannot be used in sociology. If there is a universal law in history, everything will happen sooner or later, which violates our "subjective initiative" and we lose our uniqueness. When there is no universal law, we can't predict the historical trend and give suggestions on social development.
Taking history as a mirror, we can know the rise and fall. This is just in contradiction with "unpredictability", and the present is guided by the trend in a specific historical stage. If my understanding is correct, it should be "pro-naturalistic historical determinism" "Universal and effective social laws can only be the laws connecting successive periods".
Our views are vague, we don't know what to base on, naturally we don't know how to criticize our own ideas, and our views will never be clear. When explaining the world, we choose the reasons that suit our preferences at will, so we gain stability. This is not a bad thing for individuals, but it is not necessarily a good thing for groups. Everyone has lost his critical ability. How can society and science progress?
What I call "historical determinism" is a way to explore social science. It assumes that historical prediction is the main purpose of social science, and this purpose can be realized by discovering the rhythm or pattern, law or trend hidden under historical evolution. 」
"We can say that the poverty of historical determinism is the poverty of imagination. Historicists constantly condemn some people, saying that they can't imagine changes in their land of Xiaotian, but the historicist himself lacks imagination, because he can't imagine that the conditions on which changes depend will also change. Poverty of historical determinism