Book Review: Development in Progress

The Long Shadow of Progress

Book Title: Development in Progress

I have always had my clear-headed suspicion on how we do go about deploying technology as a civilization in this modern dispensation – perhaps I was jolted into that state because of social media, and its innumerable negative externalities. But one of the things I haven’t done is take time to meditate on the subject matter critically, and preferably write up essays to articulate those meditations. But maybe none of that is necessary if I can pick a good book on the subject and read. The latter is what I ended up doing, by happenchance.

In the annals of human history, progress has been an intoxicating elixir – one could say –  fueling our relentless pursuit of technological advancement and societal growth. But what if this very notion of progress, with its narrow focus on material wealth and technological prowess, is leading us towards a precipice? That's the unsettling question posed in “Development in Progress,” a meticulously researched and compellingly argued feature article published by The Consilience Project. (While this piece is technically called a feature article, it is a material of a mini book length hence my inclusion in this book review section of the blog)

The article, a tour-de-force of interdisciplinary analysis, dissects the prevailing narrative of progress – what they call naïve progress –  revealing its inherent flaws and devastating externalities. It challenges our comfortable assumptions about improvements in life expectancy, poverty reduction, educational outcomes, and even the decline in violence, revealing a more nuanced and troubling reality. Through meticulous examination of case studies, most notably the invention of synthetic fertilizers and the rise of social media, the authors illustrate how even seemingly beneficial innovations can have far-reaching and often unintended consequences.

I couldn’t stop thinking about iatrogenic while reading the article – a word I first stumbled on while reading one of Nassim Taleb’s book. Iatrogenic which means harm caused by the healer, was extended to other domains such as economics in his writings. There is a similar motif in this critique of technology development and deployment, simply put – negative externalities.

To be clear, the author’s argument is not simply a rejection of technology, nor would I be remotely in such WhatsApp Group. Instead, they offer a powerful critique of our current approach to technological development, highlighting the dangers of narrow optimization at the expense of holistic well-being. They argue that our current system, driven by perverse incentives, prioritizes short-term gains and externalizes costs onto future generations and the natural world. We are, in essence, borrowing from the future to fuel our present, leaving a legacy of environmental degradation, social unrest, and even existential emptiness. And on the point of existential emptiness – one of the things I was quickly shocked by when I moved to the United States many years ago is the fact that more people commit suicide in the United States than in countries in West Africa, say. I know technology isn’t the whole story here, but let’s face it, at the very least, those kinds of stats points to the fact that technology, while important might be overrated in the context of having a good, happy life.

Also, the article is particularly incisive in its analysis of the psychological underpinnings of our unwavering faith in progress. The author draws parallels between our relationship with the current world system and Stockholm syndrome, suggesting that many of us, despite experiencing the downsides of “progress,” cling to the narrative because we feel powerless to change it and fear acknowledging its flaws. This cognitive dissonance, fueled by a constant barrage of hypernormal stimuli – from addictive social media feeds to the endless pursuit of material wealth – keeps us distracted from the deeper questions about the meaning and purpose of our lives.

But the article offers more than just a sobering diagnosis – which is why I particularly like the piece; it also outlines a path towards a more mature and sustainable form of progress. Drawing on concepts such as prudent problem-solving, yellow teaming, and synergistic design, the author proposes a framework for developing technologies that internalize their externalities, prioritize long-term well-being, and promote a reciprocal relationship with nature. Regenerative agriculture, with its focus on restoring soil health and promoting ecological balance, is presented as a compelling example of this mature approach in action.

The takeaway from the article couldn’t be more straightforward: as the pace of technological change continues to accelerate, we must confront the limitations of our current model of progress and embrace a more nuanced and responsible approach to innovation. The alternative, the author warns, is a dystopian future marked by environmental collapse, societal disintegration, and a profound loss of what it means to be human.

To end, I will pay a lot of money to watch Daniel Schmachtenberger and Stephen Pinker (or say Marc Andreesen) debate, as they seems to be on two extreme ends of this debate.