In contemporary occidental society, one doesn’t need to look the political forces scrupulously to detect two main groups bearing drastically opposed values. This is particularly true in the USA, where one group, often Republicans, appears more conservative than the other one, composed mostly of Democrats. This distribution of political forces emphasizes a central political question: is progress necessarily a threat? In other words is it vital to prevent the evolution of our lifestyle, or to come back to our former way of life?
One can argue that traditional way of life is vital to society. Indeed, modern lifestyle, in occidental society, induced a lot of issues, such as global warning, or the rise of inequalities. In other words, even though we were poorer in the past, society wasn’t threatened by its own organization. Moreover, existence wasn’t difficult, as it wasn’t based much on the accumulation of capital and social comparisons between individuals.
Nevertheless, we support the thesis that modern societies, even if they present issues, are desirable for mankind. Indeed, the XIX and XX century, that created a cleaving with the rest of history, have testified of the rise of civil rights and social gains, such as abortion, equal rights, democracy. Those rights ensure protection and safety for everyone, which wasn’t the case in the past.
In a more pragmatic perspective, it seems impossible to give up our gains and assets in order to come back to an organization of society gone in the records.
To conclude, even if many things would be easier if we lived in a traditional society, progress, which seems inevitable, ensure respect of mankind. However, we can highlight the fact that mankind needs to be careful about progress: progress isn’t necessary a perfect thing, and it needs to be dealt with carefully, especially in the field of science and technology
In contemporary occidental
society
, one doesn’t need to look the political forces
scrupulously
to detect two main groups bearing
drastically
opposed values. This is
particularly
true in the USA, where one group,
often
Republicans, appears more conservative than the other one, composed
mostly
of Democrats. This distribution of political forces emphasizes a central political question: is
progress
necessarily
a threat?
In other words
is it vital to
prevent
the evolution of our lifestyle, or to
come
back to our former way of life?
One can argue that traditional way of life is vital to
society
.
Indeed
, modern lifestyle, in occidental
society
, induced
a lot of
issues, such as global warning, or the rise of inequalities.
In other words
,
even though
we were poorer in the past,
society
wasn’t threatened by its
own
organization.
Moreover
, existence wasn’t difficult, as it wasn’t based much on the accumulation of capital and social comparisons between individuals.
Nevertheless
, we support the thesis that modern
societies
, even if they present issues, are desirable for mankind.
Indeed
, the XIX and XX century, that created a cleaving with the rest of history, have testified of the rise of civil rights and social gains, such as abortion, equal rights, democracy. Those rights ensure protection and safety for everyone, which wasn’t the case in the past.
In a more pragmatic perspective, it seems impossible to give up our gains and assets in order to
come
back to an organization of
society
gone in the records.
To conclude
, even if
many
things would be easier if we
lived
in a traditional
society
,
progress
, which seems inevitable, ensure respect of mankind.
However
, we can highlight the fact that mankind needs to be careful about
progress
:
progress
isn’t necessary a perfect thing, and it needs to
be dealt
with
carefully
,
especially
in the field of science and technology