17 Comments

I am sure that you already aware of this (but your readers may not be), but there are many other books on progress other than Mokyr's and Landes' books.

Here is a list of the books that I think are the best:

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/the-9-essentials-for-progress-studies

Here is a link to many summaries of books on progress-related topics (from my online library of book summaries):

https://techratchet.com/industrial-revolution-learning-path/

https://techratchet.com/why-did-europe-get-rich-first-learning-path/

Expand full comment

That's a great list, thank you. I need to read your book and Abundance, but I've read all of the others and concur with your assessment. I was a graduate student when Joel was working on Lever of Riches, which was the most incredible intellectually transformative experience for me. Like Joel my take is probably less materialist than I think yours is, and I look forward to digging in to your analysis.

Expand full comment

I am happy to email you a free copy of both my books on Progress if you are interested in reading them.

If you subscribe to my column and give me a hint as to your email address, I can find it and send you copies.

Expand full comment

M

Expand full comment

Would be curious to hear your take on the recent Acemoglu and Johnson book, Power and Progress. Their argument is not totally inconsistent with Mokyr's (though they disagree with McClosky that bourgeois virtues were "unabashedly positive"—their words), but they think the most important causes of the "middling revolution" that took shape first in England and then Britain were institutional changes—rooted not in Enlightenment thought but in the decline of feudalism—that encouraged innovation starting as early as the 15th century, and flourished gradually on through the 1800s as various new groups resisted the bonds of feudalism more successfully than in other places in the world. Acemoglu and Johnson claim also to be inspired above all by the works of Robert Brenner, though they don't much use a Marxian lingua franca.

Expand full comment

Interesting article. You might be interested in my Substack column, which also focuses on human material progress. Joel Mokyr wrote a great recommendation of my book, which my Substack column is based.

I think that I have a more compelling explanation for modern progress than Mokyr's explanation of useful knowledge. I think we need to understand the material conditions that lead to increasing useful knowledge.

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/understanding-how-humans-create-progress

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/understanding-the-causes-of-modern

And a more general statement of my progress-based beliefs:

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/a-manifesto-for-the-progress-based

Expand full comment

Thanks Michael; I follow you so, happily, you show up in my Notes regularly!

Expand full comment

Progress? We have gone backward with wounded electricity grids such as in Texas. We have more reliability issues today than ever before since the industry began the nearly 150 years ago....

Expand full comment

The evidence for progress goes way beyond electrical grids:

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/evidence-of-progress

Expand full comment

Yes, of course! But we have a centrally planned electricity market that speaks for itself.

Beware of Kiesling/Giberson posing as free marketeers on this point.

Expand full comment

America is wealthy enough to afford lots of the sclerosis at least for now. ORD T2 already $3b over projections and construction has not started. TSMC can't figure out how to cost effectively build a fab in the USA. SFO, land of millionaires, can't figure out how to get people off drugs and the street. US defense contractors can't build world class ships. The only way out of the predicament is progress. Lots, probably most of it will be technological. But lots of it needs to be administrative/bureaucratic. For all his baggage, Musk's slashing of positions at Twitter probably has some useful lessons. How many CEOs would even think about radical organizational streamlining? I am hopeful that smart people can and will figure it out.

Expand full comment

Thanks for exploring this Lynne. One of the critical questions that's often running in my mental background.

I suppose there could be a correlation between the information overload of the last period and writer's natural pessimism, although a simple scan doesn't ping anything. Dismal Science alright... but is the Wisdom of the Crowds misguided?

On the other hand, there are definite trends that are difficult to ignore. Social inequality, power monopolization, over leveraging of everything, frailty of core society constructs and bonds. Climate instability. Impending close to Pax Americana. Much hyperventilating about apocalyptic fantasies and very little problem solving on national and international crises. True existential risks that are multiplying. A dissolving collective Reality.

Quality of life in the developing world.. for Humanity.. has improved greatly. Yet existence in the developed world has become highly precarious and insecure. There isn't a unifying philosophy or spirit of the age to wrap us all in warm and fuzzy unless thats TitTok kittens.

Personally, while appreciating our progress last century, I see nothing in the history of humanity that indicates we are capable of solving todays challenges much less tomorrows. Perhaps it's simply become too complex. But everyday the reality of working in Energy Transition and enabling Electrification, where we struggle to do the obvious, drives these points home.

Expand full comment

Byron, one book I would recommend to you is Mancur Olson's The Rise and Decline of Nations (https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300254068/the-rise-and-decline-of-nations/). Olson documented how nations become sclerotic over time, and it's a complex combination of growth, culture, and government intervention. I am going to write more about it at some point soon, but Olson's analysis is one reason why I focus so much on deregulation, reducing entry barriers, reducing barriers to innovation, because if we don't allow the dynamics of change to occur we end up in sclerotic societies. The electricity industry and its regulation are definitely sclerotic.

Expand full comment

Ordered! Also suggest the original Bridgewater/Dalio study, Why Nations Succeed and Fail.. influential for me. Growth leads to expansion, but when growth slows.. inside interests monopolize surplus, then over leverage the public fund with non-productive debt and draining crises of choice (kill the golden goose). So same result, sclerotic societies organized by extractive/non-productive power structures that prevent change.

My belief of faith if you will, is that the Electricity industry born in the 2nd Industrial Revolution won't survive the 5th (AI). And because it is a Prime industry we have an opportunity to reorganize the system. We're perhaps the first generation to understand these long dynamics and be more deliberate.

Expand full comment

I hope you are right that we can be more deliberate with a better understanding of epistemology and decentralized systems, without it devolving into the kind of ill-informed and special interest influenced central planning that Hayek warned about.

Expand full comment

Yes, Mancur Olson's book is very compelling as to why nations can decline over time. I believe that our public policy is unintentionally undermining the foundations of progress. Olson's book helps to explain why this tends to occur.

Expand full comment

I actually just published an article on the subject that you might find interesting:

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/why-are-people-still-unhappy-in-a

I also have another article on the relationship between happiness and material progress:

https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/does-material-progress-lead-to-happiness

Expand full comment
Error