History does not repeat it self.

I must start off by thanking my for providing a courteous and through response. The mistaken intent is quite understandable given the wording. I merely wish to engage in an entertaining and though provoking debate rather then squabble for points ranking. I think we can both agree for the sake of the debate that history, in the literal sense, dose not and can not repeat itself for the statements mentioned and many others. I also thank my opponent with their suggestion in change of wording from false to invalid and agree to the change. I indeed agree to debate the spirit of the intended meaning behind the phrase "history repeats itself", rather than building arguments upon semantic technicality. I will show to the best of my abilities the invalidity of the statement 'history repeats itself" by means of refuting its intentions. For purposes of this debate I will agree with my opponents use of a Thucydides quote as a possible origin to the phrase in debate and try to establish its general purpose. I shall also attempt to use the contemporary quotation from George Santayana to fther expain the general purpose of the phrase in debate and its invalidity. If my opponent agrees to the established intent behind the phrase then i shall continue my argument building off this premise. Thucydides believed in being as accurate as possible in his descriptions and only recorded events that occurred in his own lifetime. He followed in the footsteps of his contemporary Heroditous, "the father of history", yet took great strides to differentiate the type of history he wrote.Thucydides was the first to apply a scientific method to recording history and avoided entertaining embellishments. Thucydides contributions to historiography earned him the title the "father of modern history" as opposed to his predecessor Heroditous, "the father of history" who was often accused of over embellishing his history for entertainment purposes. Thucydides was also know fro witting history for a moral purpose, to teach a lesson to future generations. "[H]is own work, he explains, has been written "not as an essay which is to win the applause of the moment" Rather, it is designed to be useful and to last, to be "a possession for all time." It will, he believes, prove of lasting value, because it contains a moral lesson" Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, II. 22 Crawley, London, J.M. Dent & Sons, 1910, p.11 In his work, Thucydides aims to teach future generations by recording an accurate history and showing the moral lesson behind its events. Thucydides history of the Peloponnesian war recants a tale intended to teach its readers a moral lesson, between good and evil, and some general truth about human relations. The selected quote of origin reaffirms Thucydides motive to writing history. "I shall be content if those shall pronounce my history useful who desire to have a clear view both of the events which have happened, and of those which will some day, in all human probability, happen again in a same or similar way.~Thucydides, History, bk. 1, ch. 22 (c.400 BC)" (source: http://forum.quoteland.com......) Thucydides teaches history so that we may avoid the problems of the past or at least know what to do if encountered by similar problems. Therefore we may assume that if the phrase "history repeats itself" derived its origins from Thucydides that its intent was to remind readers that the lessons learned from the past, from history, will save you in similar future events. This view is also shared in the contemporary quotation from the author George Santayana used by my opponent as a contemporary comparison. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ~George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905, ch. 12 Santayana implies, much like Thucydides, that history has a lesson to be learned and that knowing them problems faced in the past can be avoided. The past holds the answers to todays problems, and possibly tomorrows as well. In a way, like Thucydides, Santayana's quote poses that the future is predictable, that event repeat themselves and knowledge of impending events will help a person to avoid catastrophe, and to a certain extent this may be valid, but life is not so predictable that lessons of the past will be applicable in future circumstances. I submit to my opponent that the phrase is used to remind people that the past contains knowledge applicable in future crisis and events, and that knowledge of past events will help a person, and or nation, to overcome potential and current problems. If he agrees then I will continue my argument on the established foundation and proceed as to why this is and invalid assumption. If he does not I shall try to resolve issues wile continuing the debate.