There’s a big problem with philosophy — a lack of testing. None of what I say can be really experimentally verified. Certain things about humanity and anthropology can be tested, but human nature cannot really be known. When experimenting, there’s supposed to be a control, and only one variable tested at a time. We have nothing like this going on. It’s hard to tell which factors affect what.

The only thing I can do is observe, and read history. History is the key. It seems like people do have a nature that is common between them for history repeats themself. History can provide answers to questions of the nature of human beings. It also provides great examples of stupidity. Check out the Maginot Line sometime.

Observation is also good, but there’s only so far I can go, without setting up experiments. Even then, results are often murky. I’ll just observe others, and myself, as things go along, and interpret them to see if I have to change my worldview.

Since there are no true experiments, we can’t tell what’s the best form of government. We can’t test without it being unethical. If there were large-scale human tests, we would have much more insight into the nature of human beings and how they socially interact. For now, again, we must rely on history to provide examples of things such as types of government. We know from history that Communism didn’t work so well, nor fascism.

Thus, if I want to show I’m right about humans, I must provide examples from the observation of others from the past and present.