>"If you think being able to take all variables you can into account and have your model spit out "better" or "worse" is crude, than you can't be asked anything cause any answer to anything is crude."

That doesn't follow logically at all!?

Trying to reduce human history down to a summative, categorical and dichotomous judgement of '-1' or '+1' is outrageously simplistic, almost by strict definition. Incidentally, precisely this observation is baked into common idioms, like 'black and white thinking', and Manichean 'good versus evil'.

You also seen to be taking an incongruently natural scientific approach to what is a largely a meta-ethical and historical question - two fields with their own, distinctive methodologies.

I don't think this conversation has been particularly constructive, so let's wish one another the best and park it.