Non-TL;DR part:I agree that it doesn't really mean anything to say "hey, your iPad is totally more powerful than a supercomputer from 30 years ago." But if you think beyond that and ask yourself "how have we arrived here, what do I use this technology for and what does it mean for society?" then I think it's a good comparison to keep in mind.
Yes, people make progress, but it's not dumb to look back upon that progress and see what it has resulted in and how it has influenced society. We have to learn from the past to avoid repeating mistakes, after all.
TL;DR warning:I'm not quite sure what the point of your examples are, but your explanations of them are making my social science senses tingle uncomfortably. I'd like to critique them a bit by slightly expanding your definition of what "progress" is, as I feel you've focused only on consumer/technological aspects of the examples you've listed and thus missed a
lot of progress and change in these fields!
Religion: That summary portrays a limited view of what religion and religious studies are. I am not religious, but I have much respect for those who study and reinterpret religious documents and tenets and question their meanings in the context of modern-day society... which is exactly what happens today. If religions failed to update with relevant moral and spiritual guidance that kept up with what was going on today (social conditions, economics, scientific advances, technology, etc.), then fewer people would follow them. This is not the case. Just look at the new Pope. He was not chosen for how well he has memorized Leviticus, but for his social policies on helping the poor (not by praying for them, but by actually addressing their needs in this life!) and his humbler, more modern approach to the papacy. The Catholic church is clearly not just looking at the past, but responding to present conditions and needs, even at risk of angering its more conservative members. And your assertion that religions resist "better ways of living" assumes that
everyone goes by
your definition of "better ways", which is a BIG assumption to make. I bet a lot of cultures to whom spirituality and religion pay a central and positive part in their lives will not like your ideal of a society with less (or maybe no) religion. I'm
not saying that religion is all good... I just think it's plain factually wrong of us to downplay its continuing relevance, significance and contribution to society, even as nonbelievers.
Education: By your apparent definition, will 'real progress' only be achieved if we stop educating students with teachers, pencils and paper? You speak of ONE kind of educational paradigm, but there are others that have been around for quite a while (e.g. the Montessori and Waldorf educational philosophies, not to mention non-Western forms of education). Education in the US alone has gone through immense social changes (remember segregated schools? What about that policy of sending Native American children to boarding schools to forget their own cultures and 'Americanize'?) and continues to be at the center of debates on policies and practice. The number of students of Latino descent will overtake those of European American descent within the next few decades. This has HUGE implications for how education will have to be provided and conducted (e.g. Spanish education will probably have to increase and they'll probably have to teach about more than just old white men in American history classes! Bring on the pre-Columbian history!).
Fashion: I suggest that fashion can also be viewed as an artform, a social statement, a vehicle of creative and social change, and an expression of culture and religion, to just name a few. And it doesn't have to JUST involve clothes! The Pink Ribbon movement for breast cancer awareness has exploded and now you can buy nearly ANYTHING in that fashionable and trademarked shade of pink. You see a clear change in what is considered "beautiful" if you look at high-fashion pictures across recent decades. Marilyn Monroe might've been the ideal in her era, but now it's boyish looks and unique bone structures. An even simpler example is the popularity of t-shirts with social and political messages. Now any kid with $20 can be involved with a socio-political movement just through the clothes they wear!
Food & health: The claim that "Food is cheaper, fresher and more convenient" depends on who you ask. The cheapest foods available to the lowest income brackets in the US tend to be the least healthy, with higher fat content and fewer nutrients (see:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22424253 and
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19394467). If you look at some of the most disadvantaged groups in the US, for example Native Americans on secluded and poor reservations, rates of preventable illnesses (heart disease, tuberculosis, etc.) and poor diets are truly shocking. Socioeconomic status is a major indicator of health in the US, which is troubling and shows that the country isn't so much of the "land of the free" but the land of those who have enough money to afford a good lifestyle. And sadly, this is a trend that has grown with more neoliberal economic policies that favor reducing state-provided welfare and lowering taxes for corporations and top-earners. However, even here, there is progress in people recognizing this as an economic issue that also affects the overall economic health of the country (income disparity is a strong predictor of economic recession). And hey, some progress happened in getting that healthcare bill passed, don't you think? I haven't even mentioned the medical advancements made in recent decades (we now have a vaccine for cervical cancer for goodness' sake!).
Cars: Again, I think we need to think BIGGER regarding the progress in cars. The two most populous countries on earth--India and China--have entered into the car production and ownership race. Not only will this have huge impacts on the countries themselves (we've already seen the dangerous air quality in Beijing that has directly resulted from an exploding private vehicle market), but they will also impact the rest of the world as they enter the global car market. And yes, safety standards for cars have increased, but this has probably been a result of increasing car ownership and a public demand for safety in increasingly powerful cars. Not to mention safety is an important marketing point to convince people to trust their loved ones in the statistically risky behavior of traveling by car. We could thus say there has been progress made in the worldwide acceptance of private car ownership, public perceptions of car safety and ways to market cars.
Planes: Sure, if you look at it from a consumer's perspective, not too much has changed about the act of flying... though mergers and advancements in technology have dramatically changed what goes on behind the scenes. Also, the recent explosion in airport security that you alluded to marks a HUGE change in our conception of safety during air travel and what it means to fly. And I guess we're not touching upon military developments and the use of drones as an area of progress?
Anyway, sorry about the tirade! I'm not trying to criticize you in particular... I just find these views quite common in tech and think the discussions would be more productive if these views were expanded and included more views from other fields like sociology and economics. :-)
