The problem of historical determinism encompasses all of these questions, as it explores the relationship between past events, future events, and the role of human agency.

Historical determinists believe that the events of the past determine the events of the future in a causal chain.

Critics of historical determinism argue that the existence of free will, the unpredictability of the future, and the role of chance and contingency in history all undermine the idea that past events completely determine future events.

Karl Marx is often seen as the most prominent advocate of historical determinism, particularly in his analysis of the economic and social forces that shape history.

Historical materialism is the Marxist theory that economic and social forces, rather than ideas or individual actions, are the primary drivers of historical change.

Dialectical materialism is a Marxist method of historical analysis that is based on the idea that history is driven by the conflict between opposing forces, or 'dialectics'.

Critics of historical materialism argue that it is too simplistic and deterministic, that it ignores the role of human agency in history, and that it is based on a false understanding of economics.

Francis Fukuyama is the philosopher most closely associated with the idea of 'the end of history', which he argues has been reached with the triumph of liberal democracy.

In 'The End of History and the Last Man', Fukuyama argues that the end of the Cold War and the collapse of communism marked the end of history as a process of ideological struggle, and that liberal democracy had emerged as the final and universal form of government.

Critics of Fukuyama's theory of the end of history argue that it is too optimistic and ignores the possibility of future conflicts, that it is based on a false understanding of history as a linear process, and that it ignores the role of culture and religion in shaping history.

In 'Historical Inevitability', Berlin argues that historical determinism is a dangerous and misleading way of understanding history because it can lead to a belief in the inevitability of certain outcomes and a denial of human agency.

Critics of Berlin's argument against historical determinism argue that it is too pessimistic and ignores the possibility of progress in history, that it is based on a false understanding of determinism, and that it ignores the role of structural factors in shaping history.

Karl Popper is the philosopher most closely associated with the idea of 'the open future', which he argues is a fundamental characteristic of human existence.

In 'The Poverty of Historicism', Popper argues that historical determinism is a dangerous and misleading way of understanding history because it leads to a belief in the inevitability of certain outcomes and a denial of human agency.

Critics of Popper's argument against historical determinism argue that it is too optimistic and ignores the possibility of decline and fall in history, that it is based on a false understanding of determinism, and that it ignores the role of structural factors in shaping history.