Perspective

I've started reading a book, A Shorty History of Progress, by Ronald Wright. And I've got a variety of thoughts/reactions/questions. For now, I'll connect it to a recent train of thought I had.

We find ourselves in a unique time in human history. And by "we" I naturally mean Americans. I could further narrow the scope of what "we" means, but I want to leave it broad on purpose. Here in the last, oh, 200 years have found ourselves in varying states of being able to decide the course of our living. Terms like "social mobility" and "self-made man" have become certain realities, to an extent. For thousands of years, "what I want to be when I grow up" was a question not pondered. Where should I live, what should I eat...these were not choices but facts, largely unalterable details of lives shaped by technological, financial, even religious limitations.

So, in light of this, I find it logical that so many of "us" struggle with what our role in this world is. "How, now, shall we live?" Call it post-modern if you like, the fact is that (again, to an extent) the growing tolerance, flexibility, and sense of entitlement places us in a situation of firsts. We have decision to make that our ancestors perhaps could not even imagine.

But, as I read this book, I come to realize that, perhaps, the themes are the same, just with different scenery and names. The book posits that as a race, humans continue on a path of ever-increasing progress. With each step of progress, another set of challenges open up. With each new step of progress, the rate of change and progress increases. And at certain points, our technological progress surpasses our moral progress, leaving us in a "progress trap." For example:

Go back thousands of years: when the hunter-gatherers improved their ability to make stone weapons, as well as improved their hunting capabilities, their populations grew because of increased, more consistent food, but their prey shrank - their technology altered their reality. They were forced to either A) keep hunting at the current rate and then starve and die or C) develop farming. They chose C. (that's incredibly simplified, too much in fact, but hopefully you get the point).

All this to say, we are over-consuming. Our technological advantages over nature (both bodily and earthly) give us "ease," but our moral understanding of life has not adapted or effected our decision making. Sure, its great to have eat tomatoes or peaches year-round. But at what cost? Taking a Caribbean cruise is undoubtedly relaxing and beautiful. But at what cost? Shop where prices are gracefully low, and where they promise to help us live "better lives," but you have to ask: At what cost?

If you've made it this far, I'm impressed. Thanks for reading my ramblings. All I'm saying is that I'm putting more thought into so much more of my life. I suspect that it is far more valuable to grow my moral stance and world view, and in result living according to those conscious choices rather than blind assumptions and cultural predispositions.


I'm not even sure what I just said. If anything.