Great Man theory

Can someone explain to me how the great man theory relates to other theories about history? I doubt the theory alone explains the course of history HOWEVER I think it would be silly to downplay the individual characteristics and actions of select historical figures. (Caesar, Buddha, Alexander the Great, et al)

>et al

I left Jesus out because I'm weary of people attacking me for bringing him up. I was raised baptist though and I also believe in the Abrahamic god as being the base deity that all spiritualism revolves around. I certainly see him as a "great man" and definitely important to human history.

ἐλπίς in Him and you will never grow weary, friend.

I actually like hearing things like this. It reminds me of one of my favorite verses.

>But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father who is in heaven. Matthew 10:33

because those are not self made men, it relies entirely on the circumstances which they born into.

Have you forgotten who Alexander's father was? The family Caesar was born into? The geographical time period in which Siddartha was born?

No one's born great in a vacuum. Millions of men alive today could've achieved similar feats under the same circumstances, you and I included.

Preach it brother.

Because there are so man infinitesimal events going on throughout history all the time that to say a single man's life based on what others have said about him which can be surmounted in a couple of wiki pages can explain a time or the advancement of the world is quite literally retarded.

I know I know. King Philip was Alex's dad. Caesar was Julii. Siddhartha's father was a raja.

But that's what I'm getting at. Does them being born into such circumstances change the validity of the theory? I'm not arguing; I'd just like to see another's understanding which might be clearer than mine.

Absolute bullshit. There has never been another person like Alexander. That combination of pothos and sheer lunatic perseverance is unmatched in history. You a fucking delusional.

I'm not gay but I'd let him cum inside me.

We all would user

>having this much of a dead man's dick down your throat

lol yeah ok you necrophiliac

>unmatched in history

Gee user, it's almost like very few people have been subject to the same opportunities as him?

Actually you know what, I take back. What he did was no easy feat, and no doubt it'd be difficult to replicate, but believing that him being born to the King/Militant to one of the most powerful kingdoms with an unmatched army then has nothing to do with his success?

yeahokpal

>muh opportunities

There were a thousand places along his campaign trail that he could have halted the march. After Persepolis he was the richest and most powerful man in the world. He could have spent the rest of his life dissolved in luxury. Instead he chose to conduct a grueling campaign through Asia that nearly killed him on several occasions and shortened his lifespan by 30 years. All he got for that was everlasting fame.

Those great men were the result of their circumstance. They played a part, but they weren't the directors.

So the great man theory requires a person to be great regardless of circumstances? Circumstances invalidate theory?

Yes, that's what great man theory is.

Materialism is that other stuff makes great men. Great man theory is stuff happens because of great men. It's not that great men don't exist.

I see. Thanks for clearing that up.

>Environmental determinism
>Historical Materialism
>Atheism

wow, this thread is really making me think...

Disease changed history more than one man.

Even Hitler was basically just the face of his party.