In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Leonardo, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 145-157, 1983 Printed in Great Britain 0024-094X/83$3.00+0.00 Pergamon Press Ltd. BOOKS Readers are invited to recommend books to be reviewed. In general, only books in English and in French can be reviewed at this stage. Those who would like to be added to Leonardo’s panel of reviewers should write to the Editors, indicating their particular interests. History of the Idea of Progress. Robert Nisbet. Basic Books, New York, 1980. 370 pp. $16.95. ISBN: 0-465-030205-4. Reviewed by J. Luknsiewicz* In this highly readable volume Robert Nisbet, the erudite Albert Sohweitzer Professor of Humanities Emeritus at Columbia University in New York, critically reviews the evolution of the notion of progress during the past 2500 years, from classical antiquity to our day. The period through the 17th century is covered in chronological order, in five chapters of Part One. Subsequent developments are presented in Part Two as specific aspects (freedom, power and persistence) of progress. The attitudes toward the idea of progress in this century and future prospects of Western Civilization are discussed in the concluding chapter and the epilogue. Extensive references to the original sources and earlier studies are incorporated in the text which, free of footnotes, is a pleasure to read. Nisbet’s critical study emphasizes many interesting paradoxes and contradictions inherent in the idea of progress. While “no singleidea has been ...as important as the idea of progress in Western civilization for nearly three thousand years”, in substantive terms progress has had more than one meaning. From the Greeks to the 20th century, progress has been equated with the continuous accumulation of objective knowledge. It has also been seen as improvement of the moral and spiritual condition of man, leading toward ever-greater perfection of human nature. But, in the Western tradition, these two views of progress are not compatible. The Greek legend of Pandora’s box and the storyof Adam and Eve tell us that “to know is to sin”. Today, there are some who see a correlation between scientificand technological advancement and moral decline. Indeed, as noted by Nisbet, “so sweeping a proposition as the idea of progress ...cannot be empirically or logically verified.” In reviewing the Classical era, Nisbet shows that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, Greeks and Romans were not committed to a cyclical view of human history, but had a clear conception of progress extending into the distant future. The Middle Ages, not long ago viewed as almost exclusively concerned with theology and contemplation of the ‘heavenly hereafter’, are now recognized as an era of invention and innovation, interest in worldly things, beginning of mechanical revolution , a period in which man emerged as the master of nature. In Medieval times there was vivid awarenessof the Greek and Roman past, and desire to build on its achievements. The aim of the Renaissance, on the other hand, was to imitate the ancients. The concept of progress-contrary to the long established views in Western historiography-is not to be found in Renaissance thought which rejected the premise of historical continuity, fundamental to the idea of progress. The thousand years since the fall of Rome were seen as a period of sterility and ignorance. Significantly, occult, witchcraft, and magic flourished during the Renaissance. The belief in the linear progress of humanity re-emerged with the Reformation and dominated the West in the 18th and 19th centuries. ‘Science’ and ‘scientist’ became sacred symbols in the West: even religions began to cite ‘scientific’ proofs of their reality. Nisbet’s review of progress since 1750is particularly valuable because of its objectivity. Writing about the controversial issue of Marxism, Nisbet notes its ‘mesmerizing’influence on several generations but also shows that Marxism is utopianism and, “despite its pretentions to and rhetoric of science, [is] fundamentally a religion”. ‘‘...as is unhappily true of all moral values, the idea of progress is susceptible...to corruption”-notes Nisbet. “The same fundamentalpurview that could lead Adam Smith, Jefferson, Mill and Spencer to conclude that humanity is moving toward higher levels of material prosperity and moral accord as the result solely of increasing individual liberty, could lead Comte, Marx...

pdf

Share