Background:
The Marquis de Condorcet theorized that progress—the notion that history shows society in a constant state of change and that those changes always lead to the betterment of society—occurs due to the nature of the mind, the constant engagement of reason. Reason may be summed as the processes of observation-analysis-conclusion, and Condorcet sees this as the basis of all decision making, and that the processes of reason will eventually lead to the perfectibility of the human mind.
Condorcet sees, in his recording of human history, the advancement of civilization driven by the gradual embrace of reason and the eventual rejection of religion beyond the idea of god as prime mover—the mere spark of creation. In this is the evidence of the perfectibility of the human mind, seen in Condorcet’s understanding of the anthropological and historical record of the changes human communities have undergone—the shift from hunter-gathering to settled communities based on arable farming, the establishment of cities and states, the division of labor, the development of language, the arts, and the sciences, the shift from monarchical to republican forms of government, etc. Reason is the ongoing process guiding the future of humankind.
In our critique of Condorcet’s notion of progress, we have, of course, anthropological research unavailable to Condorcet. For that, we noted the work of James C. Scott’s Against the Grain. In our discussion of this work, we studied the transition from hunter-gathering to arable farming, the nature of early farming communities, the effect of what he terms the domus on newly domesticated animals, plants, parasites, and humans. We examined the inequities that fueled the growth of early states, the reasons for their relative instability. Further, in our reading of Trial of Socrates by I.F. Stone, we noted how the economic relationship between large-scale landowners and other classes of society effected the development of political theory in Hellenic Athens, the basis of modern political theory.
Assignment:
Consider the anthropological record provided by Scott. How does his account of the gradual transition of hunter-gathering to arable as the primary mode of subsistence, the volatile nature and the inequities between classes typical of early states, the punishing nature of arable farming and the ways early state acquired labor power, and the reaction to all this of the mass majority inside and outside the polity challenge the assertions of the Marquis de Condorcet? Rather than attempting to summarize Against the Grain offer details from a close reading on three or four specific aspects that reflect (critically or otherwise) Condorcet’s theory of progress. Do you find these challenges to be successful? How have they changed your idea of progress?
In addition, consider The Trial of Socrates by I.F. Stone—specifically the way in which Socrates teachings and his students might be viewed in the context of their time. How does his ideology align with democratic forms of government? How does his embrace of oligarchic Sparta and doctrine of essential forms stand in opposition to the optimism of Condorcet’s Tenth Epoch?
