> By pointing to rational or moral failures, you already imply that we are supposed to act in a certain way.
Don't keep such an open mind that your brain falls out.
> If it is irrational that history repeats itself, do you think that it would be rational if history progressed towards some goal
It has, often. For example, 50 years ago a bunch of fossil fuel executives decided it would be best to let the planet burn, so they can keep making money.
History progressed toward their goal, and now we're starting to really suffer. But they have their megayachts.
Rationality, and by extension rationalism, refuses to investigate the question of whether the axiomatic assumptions upon which the rational conclusions are based are valid.
So of course superyachts are perfectly rational. But of course they are far from reasonable.
This is a major question in philosophy, not just some random aside in an HN comment thread.
Most famously, Hegel believed that human history trends & tends towards the perfection of human nature and society. Many other philosophers and philosophies fundamentally disagree with Hegel, and assert that history has no teleological purpose built into it.
Perhaps acknowledge the depth and history of this question before throwing out some quick asides about it?
I'm not going to debate whether or not fossil fuel executives choosing to lie to us and burn the planet is moral or rational, "because teleology". Ugh.
You seem to feel fairly certain that humanity is "on a path", and that there's going with that flow and there's going against it. You're welcome to believe that, but it's far from a settled POV.
As for lying executives, they are immoral and only rational when viewed through the lens of their own selfishness.
> You seem to feel fairly certain that humanity is "on a path"
Look at a climate graph. That's the path I'm talking about. Look into the Anthropocene Extinction - that's us. We're walking that path; or more accurately, sleepwalking on it. It's not subjective whatsoever; there's mountains of hard data on this.
Extrapolating that into teleology / philosophy / my worldview was entirely your invention and interpretation.
Don't keep such an open mind that your brain falls out.
> If it is irrational that history repeats itself, do you think that it would be rational if history progressed towards some goal
It has, often. For example, 50 years ago a bunch of fossil fuel executives decided it would be best to let the planet burn, so they can keep making money.
History progressed toward their goal, and now we're starting to really suffer. But they have their megayachts.
Do you think that's rational?