Let us now reconsider the question whether history moves in a particular direction, even though there is no goal as such. We could answer this question in the affirmative, if we could identify some direction, as such, on pure historical evidence. Identifying the direction means being able to point out some basic beliefs and values, towards which the human family may have been moving over the centuries past, albeit, haltingly, deviously, even reversibly, as the case may be. These ideas and values, if any, may well be called 'Consensus ideas and Values’

Grand Consensus of Ideas and Values

It seems to me, the human family has been moving towards an enormously slow but grand consensus. As examples of this consensus one may cite the ideas and values of reverence for life, dignity and equality of man, dignity of labour, gender equality, equality of opportunity, religious or cultural pluralism, secularism or separation of church and state, democracy, scientific attitude and technology, welfare state and planning for social security, family planning, environmental control, political federalism, international controls and standards, and world brotherhood.

The above consensus ideas, which are value judgments, are not capable of any logical, scientific or objective proof. Nor could it be claimed that the consensus has already been reached. Thus, for instance, the issue of the separation of church and state is a highly controversial, rather explosive issue in the Muslim segment of the human family. The concept of the equality of the sexes is also, perhaps, just one shade less controversial. Again, the entire human family is still groping for and, unfortunately violently disputing, about the ideal pattern for reconciling two basic, but highly conflicting human needs—social or economic security and individual freedom and creative self-realization. Even the wisest and most knowledgeable statesmen, philosophers and social scientists of the human family stand baffled and perplexed at the complexity of human affairs. They are no able to lay hands on any simple panacea, for reconciling the above conflicting needs. Nevertheless, it may, justifiably, be said that a consensus is in the process of emerging, through the steady interchange and fusion of ideas, the shrinking of space, instant global communication, trial and error, the exposure of illusions, the shattering of politico-economic dreams or expectations from one's favoured 'ism' or interpretation of religion, in short, the march of history. The consensus ideas must however be viewed as ever 'open' in the changing human situation.

No Verifiable Hypothesis

Whether the slowly emerging consensus is a willed goal, or is merely the unintended resultant of situational forces cannot be conclusively settled for reasons already given. The ‘telos’ of the theist, and the ‘social dynamics’ of the historical materialist, both, more or less, reflect human hopes, fears, attitudes and values. Thus, they can not claim the status of being verifiable hypotheses. While man can live the good life in a universe without God, or without an immanent Divine purpose, these ideas enhance man's ontological dignity, moral motivation and confidence in success in the midst of undeniably heavy odds and obstacles on the cosmic stage.

Empirical history, thus interpreted, becomes a major pathway to wisdom. By describing and connecting different phases and facets of man's story, understanding human character and cultural patterns through historical research and investigation, history leads man, from the philosopher’s abstract theories of mind and spirit, towards a concrete organic vision of man in the universe. While classical philosophy deals with the abstract, formal structure of man, history, like great literature, reveals his concrete psychic depth. Both functions are necessary and complementary. Conceptual abstraction is ever in the danger of getting vitiated by linguistic and conceptual confusions, particularly the fallacy of reification—mistaking a grammatical noun for a metaphysical entity. History, at its best, overcomes this ever lurking danger by entering into the spirit of an individual's life or age, enabling the reader to ‘empathize’ with the inner world of different individuals and ages. The reader becomes the living witness of the human drama on the cosmic stage, and is transformed from a historical microcosm into a historical macrocosm. This is, perhaps, the fullest ‘humanization’ of the individual, and a much higher stage from his earlier ‘socialization’ through cultural conditioning. This birth of the ‘universal individual’ as distinct from the ‘ethnocentric individual’ is the special gift of history, rather than of philosophy, science, mathematics, religion or art. This special gift is wisdom, while the special gift of science is knowledge and the power of technology.