Myth of Progress

Historian J. B. Bury[1] wrote in 1920:

"To the minds of most people the desirable outcome of human development would be a condition of society in which all the inhabitants of the planet would enjoy a perfectly happy existence....It cannot be proved that the unknown destination towards which man is advancing is desirable. The movement may be Progress, or it may be in an undesirable direction and therefore not Progress..... The Progress of humanity belongs to the same order of ideas as Providence or personal immortality. It is true or it is false, and like them it cannot be proved either true or false. Belief in it is an act of faith."

In historiography, the Idea of Progress is the theory that advances in technology, science, and social organization inevitably produce an improvement in the human condition. That is, people can become happier in terms of quality of life (social progress) through economic development (modernization), and the application of science and technology (scientific progress). The assumption is that the process will happen once people apply their reason and skills, for it is not divinely foreordained. The role of the expert is to identify hindrances that slow or neutralize progress.


[1]John Bagnell Bury (1861 – 1927), known as J. B. Bury, was an Irish historian, classical scholar, Byzantinist and philologist.



Some 20th century authors refer to the "Myth of Progress" to challenge the Idea of Progress, especially the assumption that the human condition will inevitably improve. In 1932 English physician Montague David Eder [2] wrote:

"The myth of progress states that civilization has moved, is moving, and will move in a desirable direction. Progress is inevitable..... Philosophers, men of science and politicians have accepted the idea of the inevitability of progress."

Eder argues that the advancement of civilization is leading to greater unhappiness and loss of control in the environment.
Sociologist P. A. Sorokin argued,

"The ancient Chinese, Babylonian, Hindu, Greek, Roman and most of the medieval thinkers supporting theories of rhythmical, cyclical or trendless move­ments of social processes were much nearer to reality than the present proponents of the linear view."

Philosopher Karl Popper emphasized the inadequacies of the Idea of Progress as a scientific explanation of social phenomena. More recently, Kirkpatrick Sale, a self-proclaimed neo-luddite author, wrote exclusively about progress as a myth, in an essay entitled "Five Facets of a Myth".\ Iggers (1965) says the great failing of the prophets of progress was that they underesti­mated the extent of man's destructiveness and irrationality. The failing of the critics of the Idea of Progress, he adds, came in misunderstanding the role of ra­tionality and morality in human behavior.

[2] Montague David Eder (1865–1936) was a British psychoanalyst, physician, Zionist and writer. He was best known for advancing psychoanalytic studies in Great Britain.
During the early 1910s, Eder became interested in the psychoanalytical theories emerging from Europe. Eder also authored original articles on psychoanalysis. His influence stretched beyond medical circles: the novelist D. H. Lawrence alluded to Eder’s pamphlet The State Endowment of Motherhood in the book The White Peacock.

In 1932 he was elected president of the medical section of the British Psychological Society. and presented his 1932 study The Management of the Nervous Patient, calling for the combination of psychoanalysis into the process of medical diagnosis.

“'When this is not feasible,”

he said,

“the physician's intelligence… must be employed to guide his patient to a measure of mental wholeness.”

Also in 1932, Eder presented his concept of the Myth of Progress. Writing in the British Journal of Medical Psychology, Eder argued that while civilization is moving forward due to advances in science, politics and technology, these advances are actually contributing to greater unhappiness as man perceived to lose control over his environment.