In the pursuit of progress, have we abandoned the idea of moral progress?

To answer this question, perhaps we need to study the history of technology.  Jill Lepore, Professor of American History at Harvard University, has studied the history of “progress,”  as it was seen by the Founding Fathers and has developed along with American political ideas and institutions. Let’s start with her at the beginning and move chronologically to outline the journey.

18^th Century

When America was founded in the 18^th century, it was on the idea that progress was moral and designed to improve the lives of others. People’s obligations firmly included the idea of the common good, so that achievement would equate to moral progress. 

19^th Century

The quest for progress changed during the 19^th century, when it developed a more technological cast. There were important inventions: the railroad, the camera… people began to think of progress as a more linear track, like a railroad.  Things went faster, became more efficient and goods became cheaper, and very quickly moral progress got replaced by ‘the progress of prosperity.’ The focus shifted from the many to the few. When asked, “How is the country going?” the answer would be, “The country is making progress.”  There was a distinct slippage from, “We have made a more just society,” to certain people making a lot more money and lot of goods becoming cheaper.

20^th Century

Moral progress was originally envisaged for the American Republic and taken for granted. The name itself emphasizes the word public and emphasizes the idea of the greater good for all the people. Now, in the 20^th century we see a move to accelerated production and accelerated consumption. The standard of living increases – therefore we have progress – but it isn’t necessarily moral progress.   

However, in the second half of the 20^th century the idea that we have achieved progress, especially technologically driven progress, begins to fall apart, because of Hiroshima. People start to ask, “What has technological progress given us?’ –  That mankind has built a bomb that could destroy the whole planet?  By the 1950s we were destroying the environment to such an extent that under the circumstances human life may not be able to continue living on this planet. Here we experienced a deep crisis in the idea of progress.

By the time you get to the 1980s and 1990s there’s a new generation of technological utopians, who start talking about innovation as progress. In the 18^th century , ‘innovation’ as a word meant progress without any concern for others; novelty for its own sake. Just invent it, who cares what the consequences are? At that time, it was an insult to tell someone they were innovating.

In contrast, innovation received high praise in the 1980s, and there was a reckless heedlessness in American business, Wall Street grubbiness, and the idea that greed was good.  Heedless innovation was fine. This then became the engine of economic growth. All that mattered was, ”Is it innovative?” By the 1990s disruptive innovation was king, and it was even better if it was radically innovative, an innovation that disrupted existing models of business. This led to a real embrace of heedlessness as a corporate value, which is a complete abdication of the original spirit of progress.

21^st Century

Innovative disruption develops like a religion and has become very culty. It has the self-righteousness of a cult and is designed to refute its critics, because amongst its principles is the belief that the past doesn’t matter. No one should care the about the past, because if you are going to be a disruptive innovator, all that matters is novelty. If you going to invent a new ride service you don’t want to study taxi dispatch because it will interfere with your creative thinking and limit your vision. Lepore contends that the disruption theory is very self-contained, and in her view introduces a huge amount of disequilibrium into a political system that was originally designed to have the public interest at heart. Government protects business capacity by creating civil order and maintaining the infrastructure, and therefore businesses should in turn be concerned with a healthy social order, and avoid wild inequalities of wealth and wild political turbulence.

Disruptive Innovation

Lepore suggests that in fact disruptive innovation is more concerned with blowing things up, and far removed from achievement being equated to moral progress. 

As we follow Lepore weaving through history, we see a tapestry of faith and hope, of peril and prosperity, of technological progress that has diverged alarmingly from moral progress.

Moral Progress

Yet, within this somewhat dark pattern we should remember the light of moral progress shining in the abolition of slavery, changed attitudes towards women, homosexuals, members of other races and non-human animals. There is room for more moral progress, certainly, but human rights laws have been enacted and there have been moves to a more inclusive society.

 If we want people to have a more inclusive morality, we need to shape the environment accordingly. For example, education is the traditional means for moral enhancement and I believe that it should be an important focus in our efforts to effect progressive changes in this area. Our young people need to be shown that there is a moral imperative in human endeavor.

The disruption that is really needed is to move from moral pessimism to concern and social involvement, so changing the current situation for the better.