Can societies be classified into utilitarian or practical societies that focus on interest, dreamy societies that care about arts and literature, thinking societies that focus on thought and philosophy, and craft societies that focus on production, etc.? Are there societal characteristics that make one society a service society where tourism flourishes, another a manufacturing society distinguished by industry, and a third where individuals earn from trade?

Social thinkers believe that societies are in the grip of history, and that the social pattern they inherit controls their path. In other words, the present of any society is merely an extension of its past, adopting its character and continuing the march of those before it. Or as the English thinker John Hamerton put it: 'The past grips the present with an iron hand.' Therefore, the emergence of societal leaders who change the course of history is a historic event that makes that leader a historical leader, and such figures are rare.

Do the dead speak? This is what the French philosopher Fouillée emphasizes. He believes that they are the ones who control us, our thinking, our vision, and thus our judgment of matters. This is because they are simply dissolved in our blood and bones, influencing our souls and shaping our minds. No matter how technologically and intellectually advanced societies become, they remain prisoners of their history, controlled by it without their awareness.

Nothing abolishes the cultural pattern of societies, including education, which was seen as a means to correct and guide societal cultures. Education has not moved toward correcting the cultural pattern of societies, but rather toward producing professional cadres working in various fields of contemporary life, leaving the society's culture to its circumstances. Economic, environmental, or political conditions, along with inherited customs and traditions, are what influence the culture of societies, thus shaping their cultural pattern.

From this, the reasons for the innate resistance to ideas and philosophies outside the ordinary and prevailing become clear. They clash with what society has been indoctrinated with and differ from what it is accustomed to and raised on. Therefore, resistance to change is a dominant human trait, and only pioneers will accept it voluntarily, while others will be forced to accept it.

Major political transformations and great events such as wars, disasters, military rule, or historical leadership are what can impose immediate effects on society through coercion and limited options. In such cases, the issue for individuals in society is no longer a matter of conviction or not, but rather either compliance leading to change or resistance leading to destruction.

Under great or emergency events, balances emerge that can lead to stability. The importance of coupling power with thought to correct an existing situation and modify it for the benefit of society becomes apparent, by imposing systems and laws that would not have been easy to adopt or apply under normal circumstances. Hence the importance of political leadership and the decisions it implements, which determine life conditions for each society, positively or negatively. Leadership can impose order and doctrine, change customs and traditions, and develop behaviors. Then over time, individuals in society adopt them, and it becomes a way of life that generations of that society get accustomed to. The result is either open progress or closed backwardness. That change, over time, builds its own methods, traditions, and customs that become prevalent. Society follows in its footsteps, either progressing or regressing.

The conclusion proven by history is that the human default is to reject change unless forced upon him. Humans do not change for benefit; they change under threat.