Philosophical Investigations - 28 April 2012 @ Lit & Phil
We discussed Progress & Evolution. Creatures progress across the plain. The traveller makes progress towards their destination. The child progresses to adulthood; the novice to the expert. Societies seem to progress through history – from superstition to reason, from tyranny to democracy, from bondage to freedom, from sin to salvation. Science stands at the head – the accumulated knowledge of physics, medicine, chemistry, biology etc seems irreversible. The power of progress seems to be a fact of modern life. But does knowledge necessarily bring wisdom? It was said that the more we know the more we know we don’t know. All agreed progress can’t be for the sake of it, but must be for something. If it’s a measure then what’s wanted, what do we lack? Is betterment sufficient? What is the good? Some feel that all this action has made things worse, and we approach meltdown. Everyone knows what we ought to do, yet very few seem to do it. Psychologists work backwards to find the cause, for if nothing else progress surely concerns causation. Do we know what caused today, or how we can cause what we aim for tomorrow? Is progress flight? We are born ourselves and made to conform. If progress concerns liberation, then perhaps we need to work backwards. The reality of the self was revisited. Politicians ask us to believe that we can choose our future. But everyone seems to want different things. The reality of choice was revisited. Why must we choose if we cannot choose not to choose? Does society evolve as species do? If we understand the “process” can’t we then improve our world? Perhaps it’s an illusion that nature makes things better. Perhaps weak things just disappear (because they are weak) and strong things persist (because they are strong), in which case there is no natural necessity, only accident – no maker, no universal mind. A cosmic tautology. Somehow we also revisited the nature of being. There was plenty of revisiting which is what we do every other Saturday at the Lit & Phil. If you have another take on this session, please comment.
Once again, Andy, the impression you give is of a very stimulating, erudite, and convivial meeting with multifaceted approaches and observations of the chosen topic. I am really going to try and attend your next meeting on “Nature” as your excellent summaries make me feel that I am missing out on something real good and nobody likes to miss out on a good party! As to this topic of “progress and evolution”, all is contingent, as always, philosophically, on what the starting point and defintional perspective is–as you appear to have embraced admirably.
Scientific and technological advancement is undeniable, I think, and something of which I am thankfully reminded every time I turn on a hot water tap, take a shower, or use the flush toilet in my bathroom. Medical care is also wonderfully improved and enhances the quality and quantity of life over previous epochs–something of which I am reminded every time I visit my GP and obtain free prescribed medicines and tests such as the local x-ray that I am due to arrange for next week; I recently learnt that David Hume succumbed relatively quickly, in his early sixties, to a debilitating gastric disorder from which I suffer, namely ulcerative colitis.
He, however, did not have my advantages of access to modern medicine which has presently arrested the symptoms of this chronic disorder (which can never really be cured) and has made possible a high quality of life once more for me to enjoy.
As a trained historian, I am also always deeply conscious of man’s inhumanity to man, and, of course, the daily news does not seem to reflect much “progress” in this respect–until one looks more closely and comparatively over time at the vastly reduced scale of humanly-induced tragedy as well as the exponentially increased scope of true human welfare and positive comforts.
Again, in the health field alone, it is truly mind-boggling to learn how vast were the numbers of people, famous (like Henry V of Agincourt) and ordinary (like most of the soldiers in history) who succumbed in great pain and discomfort to dyssentry or similar plagues and contagious disorders.
Philosophy itself–like all the blessings of culture– is only possible as a leisure or professional pursuit because of mass literacy and universal access to libraries, information and the internet.
Much more can, of course, always be done, and one must not rest too easily on one’s laurels or abandon ideals to be vigorously pursued. But it does no harm either to be cognisant and thankful, now and again (and Tiny Tim like) of the very real ameliorations and blessings of our modern age. Thanks.
Thanks for the encouragement Peter. My notes aim to give a flavour and are not any sort of thesis or conclusion. I very much enjoy these sessions, but some others may not agree! I think you know I’m not a big fan of progress, but don’t think I’m wishing away the technology that relieves our various ailments as we all work our way through every increasing periods old age. Some things get better, some things get worse – the picture across the ages is mixed, and complex. My main objection is to necessary progress, the notion of an inevitable conquest of nature though endless expansion of scientific knowledge and technological development. Determinism I suppose. Hume did himself no favours with all the drinking, womanising, and fine dining! His suggested that nothing in the future is (a priori) certain, not even the sunrise! Perhaps we still all hope for a salvation of sorts. The Arab Spring, like the Velvet revolution, has been portrayed as the inevitable sweep of history, backed by a benign twittering and tweeting technology. The killing in Syria continues and has slipped from the headlines. And then there’s the popular idea that we will all keep getting richer.. Determinism has let a few people down of late – I guess it always will! As it happens I can’t go to the next session, but as you know, all are always welcome.