Hard Problem of Progress

The problem of valuation: Progress toward what? We conflate technological advancement with moral or civilizational improvement, but they are not the same. You can have progress in computation alongside regress in democracy, progress in medicine alongside regress in community cohesion. The hard problem is that there is no objective, universally agreed-upon metric for "progress." It is a normative, value-laden concept. One group's utopia is another's dystopia. Therefore, any claim of progress is inherently political, reflecting the values and goals of the person making the claim, not an empirical fact about the world.

Example: Is a society with smartphones, genetic engineering, and space tourism, but with rampant inequality, anxiety, and ecological degradation, "more progressed" than a stable, agrarian society with strong community bonds, low stress, and sustainable practices? Techno-optimists say yes; advocates of degrowth or traditionalism say no. The hard problem: There's no scientific instrument to settle this. It's a philosophical and ethical judgment call. History isn't a video game with a single high-score; it's a messy story with multiple, conflicting plotlines, and we can't agree on what a "good ending" even looks like. Hard Problem of Progress.

Hard Problem of Progress by Enkigal January 24, 2026