Unification Thought

By Dr. Sang Hun Lee

Chapter V - Theory of History (Part 2)

Section D - The Unity, Individuality and Difference of Historical Development

In what form has history, with these laws of creation and restoration as the bases, been developing as a whole? To answer this question, let us state the view based on the Unification Principle.

(i) The Unity of Historical Development

If man had not fallen and history had not started with sin, history would have continuously developed with unity. However, it is now broken into pieces.

Jaspers says, "Since Adam is the ancestor of mankind, we human beings have all come from the hands of God and have been created in the form similar to that of God." (Jaspers, Origin and Goal of History) What he says is true. If human beings, at the first formation of a family, had established an ethical system with the Four Position Base as the center, and the system had further been applied to the tribe and nation or state, there would have been no disruption or opposition at all.

If man had not fallen, he surely would have established an organic hierarchical system, similar to the human body. This system, formed through the principles of creation, especially the laws of the dominion of the center and of similarity, would have had leaders, such as the head of family in the "Age of the Family" and chief of tribe in the "Age of the Tribe"; and people would have had an inseparable relationship of Heart, that is, an ethical relationship with the center of every respective society. Thus a great family-type state would have been established with a leader, appointed by God, at the center; and when the number of human beings had greatly increased, the state would have been further enlarged to a world-wide scale.

Because of the fall, however, the emotionally harmonized relationship was broken. Due to the shortage of love and many egoistic motives, a center different from what God had intended was established, the norm of love (Heart) was broken and contradictions, disruptions and quarrels appeared.

(ii) The Individuality of Historical Development

In order to save mankind from such a hopeless chaos, God tries to separate an Abel-type person from the chaos, and centering on him creates a group of people who believe in and love God. They are the so-called chosen people. In the meantime, God breaks into pieces the arrogant groups who reject Him and act as if they themselves were God.

Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the sons of men had built. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; and nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech." So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel. (Genesis 11:4-9) (Note: Babel means "stain" or "soil." Its meaning is the same as that of Babylon.)

As a result, the unity of historical development was lost and individuality appeared. This is the reason that individual histories, such as national histories have come to appear. [Note: Even if man had not fallen, individuality might have appeared in different tribes, nations and states because man is the manifestation of God's individuality. However, this individuality would have been based on unity, not individuality separate from unity which is full of contradictions, oppositions and quarrels.]

Yet we do not say that unity in history disappeared altogether. For instance, the history of the United States of America has a relationship with that of Britain, the history of Britain has a relationship with that of Western Europe, which in turn has a relationship with that of ancient Greece and Rome. Although the countries are now separated from each other, there are some historical contents common to them all.

We think, therefore, that history has individuality as well as unity. This is the application to history of the ontological standpoint by which we regard all phenomena as the unification of universality and individuality by the give-and-take law.

The traditional views of history were apt to emphasize the individuality of the units of the nation or state (dynasty). On the other hand, modern views have come to regard history as a world history with unity. Especially those historians like Toynbee, who in trying to see world history from the perspective of culture, regarding history as cultural history, are rather apt to ignore the individual aspect of history by paying too much attention to its universal aspect. However, we look at history from the viewpoint of the unification of these two aspects by the G-T action law.

(iii) Differentiation of Historical Development

There is also a differential aspect in the development of history, because human history is the history of the providence of salvation or re-creation.

In all cases, creation starts from one. According to the Unification view of history, one human being named Adam was created at first, and if he had not fallen, he and his spouse would have formed one family, which would have developed gradually into a nation and then a state.

Since the providence of re-creation after the fall of man is also a kind of creation, one man, one family, one tribe, one nation and one state have been separated in turn from the world of evil, and then the providence has been carried out centering on this nation or state.

According to Christianity, the people of the nation so set as the center, are called the chosen people. The providence for these chosen people is called the "Central Providence", while the providence for other peoples or states is called the "Peripheral Providence." Concretely speaking, the Central Providence before Christ was the providence for the Israeli people, and the providence after Christ was that for Christianity (or the Occident).

The words "central" and "Peripheral" may sound discriminatory in value; however, as the Bible says, "And do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham." (Matthew 3:9) According to the Principle of Creation a "center" must be set up somewhere in order to completely save all mankind and to create the innocent new world at the end of history. In short, this discrimination is only a means to an end. Because of this differentiation in the Providence, the differences between the history of the center and the history of the periphery come about.

The laws of historical development (laws of creation, laws of restoration) are applied very precisely to the center but not as precisely to the periphery (See Section F, "The Pattern of Historical Development"). This is what differentiation in the development of history means. The differentiation can be said to refer to the degree of application of the historical laws.

The reason such differentiation appears in history is that history is fundamentally the history of creation (re-creation) or the providence of the salvation of mankind, which begins from one person. For salvation, the Messiah is needed, and the nation to which the Messiah is sent naturally can not help but become the chosen people. The Israeli people were chosen as the center for the Providence; however, since they did not accept Christ as the Messiah, the Providence was transferred from them to the Western peoples, and the history of these peoples became the central history for the acceptance of the Second Advent of the Messiah.

In the meantime, the histories of other countries have become peripheral histories to which only sages have been sent. Thus beliefs have been established centering on each of these sages to wait for the final salvation which will come from the Central Providence.

Section E - The Laws of Historical Development and the Method of Studying History

(i) The Basic Laws of History

We have previously stated the various laws and factors which influence history. Here let us think about the most fundamental laws that are applied to the whole of history. We take the standpoint that the laws of existence are similar to the laws of cognition. Accordingly, the basic laws that are applied to history are not only the base for various objective laws of historical development but also the grounds for the method of our historical study (cognition).

As stated above, various laws have influenced the development of history, and of them, the most important are the G-T action, the repulsion action and the action of will (see below).

(ii) History and the Give-and-Take Law (G-T Laws)

First, we are going to explain G-T action. In both the natural world and human society, it is necessary to carry out G-T action between the subject and object beings to bring about development.

In the development, which is the content of history, the G-T action between man and his material conditions and the G-T action between the countless people who compose societies, have of course stimulated the development of society. But the most important factor for development is the G-T action between the leaders (subject) and the public (object). If the leaders, including the sovereign, govern correctly and the public heartily follows all their policies, the society will without fail become prosperous. It is because of this G-T action between the subject and object (leaders and ordinary people) that the culture of mankind has made such remarkable progress during the past several thousand years.

We can not ignore the fact that the development of productivity was also a great factor in the development of society. Since the development of productivity is also a kind of development, we think that there must be a G-T action between a subject and object in its development. Concretely speaking, this is the mutual G-T action between human desires and the material conditions. This is regarded as the cause of the development of productivity (Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal, published by the International Federation for Victory Over Communism).

These are all give-and-take actions. It is the law of G-T action, then, that lies at the base of historical development. According to the Unification Principle, this law is called the "Law of Give-and-Take Action."

Another important law closely related to the G-T action law is the repulsion law. This phenomenon of repulsion between the subject and subject or object and object is also a very important factor for the understanding of history. (We shall deal with this issue in detail in the "Historic View of Struggle Between Good and Evil.")

(iii) The Law of Will-Action

Human desires are also very important for our understanding of the laws of history. After all, man's basic motives in social life result from desire. We have many desires in social life, but the basis of our desires (we call them basic desires) are classified into two kinds; that is, material desires seeking for food, clothing and housing, and spiritual desires seeking after truth, goodness and beauty. According to Unification Thought, the former are called Hyung Sang desires and the latter Sung Sang desires.

Based on these basic desires, countless actual desires have developed (See Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal), and in order to satisfy these desires, man acts with a concrete will. Designing, planning, determination, decision, invention, etc. are all concrete expressions of the will-action.

Thus, if we analyze the flow of history, we find that the above-mentioned G-T action and repulsion laws come from the mutual action or repulsion action between the mutual wills of man (desires). The mutual co-action between the will of the subject (desire) and the will of the object (desire) is G-T action, while the mutual repulsion between the will of a subject and the will of another subject is repulsion action. (See "Historic View of Struggle between Good and Evil")

Communists regard the part of will in social development as secondary or derivative, and assert that the primary factor of development is the material conditions such as the "contradiction between productive forces and the production relation." However, there would be no development of the productive forces or of the production relations if man had no original desire. Social development has not been brought about by material conditions alone; it is correct to think that the resultant of the G-T action between human will (desire) and the material conditions has brought about development.

For example, the invention of the steam engine (productive forces) was the product of the give-and-take between Watt's desire for invention and the social and material conditions in England at that time. Watt's desire and knowledge were the subject conditions, whereas the social and material conditions in England, where capitalism was growing, were the object conditions; that is, the G-T action, brought the invention of the steam engine.

Thus the will of the subject is the decisive factor when the G-T law and repulsion law work in the development of history, and the combination of this will factor and the object factors produces development. This "Law of Will Action" we sometimes concisely call "Will Law."

(iv) The Historic View of the Struggle between Good and Evil Repulsion Law

Communists say that the history of man is the history of class struggle. We do not contradict their assertion that history has been a history of struggle, but we do not think that the struggle has been between classes alone. We can not deny the fact that struggles of non-class character such as those between individuals, nations, states, alliances and religions were even more numerous than those between classes. (See Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal)

What is the universal element common to all the struggles of man? It is the struggle between good and evil.

As stated in the Section on the Law of G-T action, all beings can maintain their existence only by carrying out a mutual give-and-take action between the position of subject "+" and object and their growth, development and multiplication only become possible by this. In order to further strengthen the G-T relation between "+" and there is the phenomenon of repulsion. This seems to be quite opposite to the G-T action. For instance, positive electricity "+" and positive electricity "+" repel each other. However, this repulsion itself is not the aim of nature, but the true aim is to strengthen the G-T action between the subject and object through this repulsion. Thus, harmony by the G-T law is the foundation of the natural world with the exception of man.

In the case of man, the repulsion phenomenon which should be only an additional means for strengthening the G-T action, has come to suppress the true G-T action. This is the struggle of man, which comes from man's evil mind brought about by his fall. For example, two men centering on one woman often fight with each other; and two women centering on one man are apt to hate each other. In the society where there is no sin, people would not quarrel with each other over one person of the other sex, since single people would regard their companions as their own brothers or sisters. (The original society is a great family in which all members are brothers and sisters to each other, regarding God as their parents.) Many struggles in history which have disrupted true G-T action have been struggles between two subjects, in other words between men of power. Struggles are the expression of the repulsion phenomenon, which should be an accessory to G-T action, but which has changed to become a hindrance to the G-T action. The struggles themselves have no power of development; instead, they rather disturb true development.

(v) Development by the G- T Action or by Struggle?

Here the following objection may be raised. Is it not because of war, the wildest of all struggles, that science and technology have rapidly progressed and atomic power developed?

Actually, the results of scientific research have been obtained by the G-T action between the desire of scientists for study, their objects of study, and the social conditions which make the study possible.

Successful results would not have been obtained if these elements repelled each other. Even though the purpose of the invention of the atomic bomb and H-bomb may have been for its use in war or defense, the process of the invention or manufacture is not struggle but close cooperation; it is the process of the G-T action.

The weapons so produced are used for struggle or destruction. Of course struggle can become the stimuli for a certain series of G-T actions (e.g. special study in science such as in the case of the atomic bomb). Even though this may be so, the assertion that we need war in order to stimulate the development of science does not have a leg to stand on, because we can find as much impetus for scientific development as we want, even aside from war. War does not promote progress and development but thoroughly disturbs them. Mankind has made progress not by wars, but regardless of wars. If there had not been the disruption and opposition of emotion and will, much more remarkable progress would have been brought about.

(vi) The Essence of Struggle

Why does a relation which should only express the G-T action change into struggle?

Originally God made all human beings for the giving and receiving of love and beauty between each other in the relative positions of subject and object. This was in order to bring about harmony based on the Four Position Base. However, if the subject becomes arrogant and does not love or persecutes the object while the former and the latter interact with each other, there grows an emotional disagreement and opposition between the two; then another subject will appear, because the object comes to need a new subject. In the phenomenon of electricity, if complete electrical negativity appears, then complete electrical positivity will surely appear. Likewise, if the people who are in the object position come to hold a certain condition (rejection of an old leader or governor and wish for a new leader), a new leader will surely appear and come to oppose the old leader, with the support of the people. Since these two subjects have different respective purposes, or their interests differ, repulsion and struggle take place. (However, a challenge by violence is always initiated by the power of evil, while power of good responds to the challenge.)

Thus those on the side of good (we call them Abel-type persons or the Abel-type groups) and those on the side of evil (Cain-type persons, or Cain-type groups) develop historical struggles. This is the repulsion phenomenon or the struggle between good and evil. However, men are fallen and there are no people who have completely good characters, so that if we consider man alone, the "good" and "evil" in the struggle are only relative concepts. But God himself wishes to realize final, complete salvation through struggle. Viewed from the side of God, therefore, the difference between the side of good (God) and that of evil is very clear. [Note: Of course there have been neutral standpoints belonging neither to the good side nor to the evil side. (See Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal)]

Who is the subject set up by God? This question can not be answered by looking at who is in power. God does not select a person by his position, but selects him as the center on the merits of the deeds of his ancestors and his faith. Examples of this are Joshua who was selected as the successor to Moses, and David who was selected as the successor to Saul.

Moreover, even if a person was selected to become the center, he is rejected if his acts are against God's will. Examples of this are Saul who was destroyed, and the Israeli people who were destroyed by Babylonia and sent into exile. As minutely stated in detail in Sub-Section (2) of Section B ("The Goal and Direction of History") God's goal to complete the Providence is absolute, but the position of the central person of Providence selected by Heaven for the completion of the aim is not absolute.

If he performs his given duty perfectly, he is given the predestined position, but if he does not do so, the predestination is changed and another person takes his position. The reason revolution sometimes takes place is that the central person does not completely fulfill his duty so that God allows a revolution by another central person to occur in order to promote the providence of salvation. On the other hand, if the existing person performs his share of responsibility no revolution will take place.

In short, human history is not the history of class struggle but of the struggle between good and evil. This is the Unification view of history.

Let us summarize what we have stated so far. The development of history results from the G-T action between the subject (sovereign) and object (public). Development does not occur through material necessity, but occurs by the G-T action between the will of the subject and the will of the ordinary people who respond to the former, or by the resultant (G-T action) between human will and the material social conditions (action of will). Lastly, generally speaking, struggles in history happen by the repulsion action between the subject on the side of good and the subject on the side of evil (Repulsion law-The Historic View of the Struggle between Good and Evil). These three are the basic viewpoints and methods for understanding history by the Unification Thought.

 Download entire page and pages related to it in ZIP format
Table of Contents
Copyright Information
Tparents Home