Shahab Sabahi
Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group
What we discussed in my earlier post “progress” on October 23rd 2011and in the social scientists group, briefly covered origins for the idea of progress and its implication for society development. Similar lines of inquiry might be pursued through other sociological literature, with the result of showing case studies that attempt to explain society, and particularly social advance. What was missed, explicit definition for the significant and essential characteristic of human beings, for striving after the accomplishment of certain life-purposes (E. Kant).. Such terms as "struggle," "conflict," "survival," and "adaptation stand for legitimate and highly important concepts in social theory, but concepts nevertheless which can give us no clue to the true nature of human progress.
The definition of progress does not imply continuous, uninterrupted advance along a smooth path, but rather the halting, infrequent lunges forward which the actual page of history discloses (B. Woods). It is possible to assume an attitude on the subject of human evolution and denying all significance to judgments of better or worse, passed on human life conditions in different ages. No matter which standards or codes picked, the concept of social valuations is universal, and, indeed inevitable. It is decidedly worth while that they should be founded, not on narrow interests or artificial conceptions of life, but on a survey of the largest horizon of truth about humanity which it is possible
In contrast to the prevailing original idea of gradual and continuous progress, the orthodox idea of cycles of change existed in the fabric of the philosophies of east and their perceptions of progress. It means regular succession of changes seen in the movements of perfect bodies the return of the seasons, the course of growth and decay in the animal and vegetable world, as well as by periods of degeneration and decline visible in the history of nation. This idea also could survive long and worked well in that part of the world. (Fukuyama )
In social level, progress is essentially an idea of value and teleological idea (Flint ). It cannot, therefore, be reduced to a formulation in terms of mechanism. The theory of natural selection is essentially a theory of the mechanics of a process. Evolution in general is a process from homogeneous to heterogeneous (Spencer). In social level, the progress is path-determined (Arrow) and the process’s goal must be set and judged to be good, and involving both the process and the judgment.
However one may still argue that with separating the process from the value judgment, the element of subjectivity appears which it may misguide societies toward a sound direction. The counter argument is “Societies, whose values have survived over the course of history, can set a series of values which suit and serve their space and time (context) as they have done”. This standpoint may fall short when the value judgment is supposed to be taken in a collective global scale (globalization). The problem lies in reconciling a standard of human values, which is valid not because it corresponds to a social actuality, but to a social need with that other dominant conception. So remote the global society ideal of life may be!
A great deal of efforts has been made by social scientists to develop a universal framework to explain the conditions of human development, though this universal framework is inconsistent where the value judgments, ethics and priorities are at play. As Bury highlighted, progress itself, does not suggest its values as a doctrine. So in social level, there may not be a supreme object of action toward the union of human thoughts.