The discussion was around progress, i.e., more or less.My original formulation was: "On what basis could one evaluate "human progress"? Evaluating or measuring something presupposes some process of measurement, and thus of comparison."
Difference is a qualitative comparison and obviously that it ubiquitous, Andy Bruce Robinson wrote:
Andy,Are you really saying that there are no meaningful qualitative comparisons to be made between different societies? If so, I'm not sure how you make sense of historical development which surely involves more than quantitative changes between different social systems? I also don't think it's compatible with a CHAT perspective.Bruce Andy Blunden wrote:Fair point Greg, but if we interpret the question about "progress" as "meaningful" in the sense you give it as "preferable" it really is meaningless, isn't it? So if I say late capitalism represents progress, meaning I prefer to live under late capitalism (so long as of course I get to choose which spot I occupy and don't get John Rawls' veil of ignorance) what on earth does that mean to me or anyone else?Andy Greg Thompson wrote:To turn Andy's original question on its head: what kind of *meaningful* comparison can be made "objectively"? -greg__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1 Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857 __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca