Kailash Kanoria recently posted a blog that summarized a set of transitional points during which the world as we knew it advanced in a sharp and unexpected manner, at least for a while and in selected locations. For example, the Renaissance turned western mankind away from an obsession with past ‘golden ages’ toward a more optimistic and human-focused future. The subsequent ‘age of exploration’ opened isolated societies to new possibilities of shared cultural experiences and ideas. The onset of the ‘scientific age’ further developed methods for understanding the world around us rather than relying upon divine or given truths. Each of these (and other) human transition points appeared to build on prior epiphanies and lead to the next set of insights. If true, can we assume progress is now linear and inexorable? Might we indeed anticipate an ever brighter future?

Let us think about that prospect for a moment. If we look back over recorded history, we can find a number of moments and places where humans demonstrated considerable ingenuity and (relatively speaking) extraordinary insight. Such periods might be found in the Fertile Crescent (between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers), in ancient Egypt, in the Indus Valley, in the river valleys of China, and in Meso-America. In such places, civilization established conditions that enabled some members of society to consider questions beyond mere survival. A few members could focus on the arts and the more esoteric imponderables in ways that might explain the mysterious world about them. Ancient stone monolithic arrangements often speak to early efforts to understand and control the natural world.

Somewhat more recently, we had the blossoming of philosophical and political thought during the Hellenic age in Greece, in the Macedonian and Persian empires, then the Roman Empire which extended from Britain to the Mid-east to be soon followed by the Byzantine empire after the collapse in the Roman West. Even then, the world did not fall into a total dark age. The Islamic Golden Age, centered in Baghdad, lasted for at least five centuries (7th to the 12th centuries) during which thinkers from all the known cultures in the world were encouraged to collaborate and advance human knowledge. In that age, there were many breakthroughs in mathematics (algebra was invented), astronomy (many stars were named during this period), human physiology, optics, poetry and the arts, and so forth. It was a kind of Renaissance in the middle-east..

The Mongol hoard eventually sacked Baghdad, the center of this cultural revolution in science and thought. While Genghis Khan was a fierce, if illiterate, warrior, he was no dummy. His empire stretched from Eastern Europe to the Pacific Ocean. While it lasted, he introduced many reforms and innovations that anticipated the modern world. He instituted ingenious concepts in trade, communications, govrrnance, and financing that later were critical to sustaining more modern forms of enduring nation states.

Still, we often think of the modern world as emerging during the European Renaissance of the 14th century. That explosion of new thinking and new ways of viewing the world was succeeded by the ‘age of discovery,’ the ‘age of early science,’ the ‘age of enlightenment,’ and finally our modern world. As noted, Kailish Kanoria recently posted a blog surveying these more recent Western ‘ages.’

I think about this past and wonder. While we had many moments when civilization had enough going for it to spur a brief explosion of new thought and innovation, none of these endured over time. Some imploded due to natural causes or cultural disasters. Others were smothered and extinguished by more aggressive (if culturally inferior) neighbors. Even in our contemporary world, we have seen some nations with free thought and opportunities for human advancement. But that situation has never been universal. We inevitably see other parts of the world remain dark and mired in mythical or backward thinking. The world of science and progress and advanced might well be fragile and temporary.

Here is my point, and my question. Despite the ephemeral nature of past explosions of learning, is this one likely to last? Are we finally on the path of linear and lasting progress? After all, the ‘singularity’ is supposed to be just years away. Humans then will join with machines to so that progress will be institutionalized in some permanent form where technology and human ingenuity combine in a synergistic and continuously evolving manner. A comforting thought, I think?

Then again, we have all these signs that science itself, the foundation of our modern world, is now under attack. Politicians call for new forms of Christian nationalism to replace our secular democracy. The worst scenarios of the dystopian, yet prophetic, novel by George Orwell (1984) appear to be gaining traction. Even medical science is discredited as the wild assertions of wanna-be totalitarian types become the new truth. Demagogue’s, like Trump, rile up their conservative followers with unfounded fears of new threats everywhere, then suggest that only they can save them.

Many believe the 2024 election is fundamental to the American experiment. Will Western society continue to evolve under a regime based on rationality and evidence or will we once again descend into darkness. Consider the following. The scientists in 10th century Baghdad who were perfecting mathematics and looking out at the world with increasing rigor probably saw no end to their relatively advanced view of reality and the natural world. Soon, however, it would all disappear with mere fragments of their advances resurfacing in Europe several centuries later.

It is hard not to overlook the prognosis of famed astronomer Carl Sagan which he made shortly before his death in the 1990s:

“I have a foreboding of an America … when technological powers are in the hands of a few, and no one representing the public interest grasps the issues; when people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties are in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what is true. We slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.”

He was talking about a future in his children or maybe grandchildren’s lifetimes. He was talking about today. I hope he was wrong, but I cannot say with certainty that he was.