What do you think?
Rate this book
History of the Idea of Progress
Nisbet traces the idea of progress from its origins in Greek, Roman, and medieval civilizations to modern times. It is a masterful frame of reference for understanding the present world. Nisbet shows why the idea of progress remains of critical importance to studies of social evolution and natural history.
Hardcover
First published June 10, 1980
15 people are currently reading
538 people want to read
About the author
Robert A. Nisbet
54 books80 followersAmerican sociologist, professor at the University of California, Berkeley, Vice-Chancellor at the University of California, Riverside and as the Albert Schweitzer Professor at Columbia University.
After serving in the US Army during World War II, when he was stationed on Saipan in the Pacific theatre, Nisbet founded the Department of Sociology at Berkeley, and was briefly Chairman. Nisbet left an embroiled Berkeley in 1953 to become a dean at the University of California, Riverside, and later a Vice-Chancellor. Nisbet remained in the University of California system until 1972, when he left for the University of Arizona at Tucson. Soon thereafter, he was appointed to the prestigious Albert Schweitzer Chair at Columbia.
On retiring from Columbia in 1978, Nisbet continued his scholarly work for eight years at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington D.C. In 1988, President Reagan asked him to deliver the Jefferson Lecture in Humanities, sponsored by the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Nisbet's first important work, The Quest for Community (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969) contended that modern social science's individualism denied an important human drive toward community as it left people without the aid of their fellows in combating the centralizing power of the national state.
Nisbet is seen as follower of Emile Durkheim in the understanding of modern sociocultural systems and their drift. Often identified with the political right, Nisbet began his career as a political liberal but later confessed a conversion to a kind of philosophical Conservatism
After serving in the US Army during World War II, when he was stationed on Saipan in the Pacific theatre, Nisbet founded the Department of Sociology at Berkeley, and was briefly Chairman. Nisbet left an embroiled Berkeley in 1953 to become a dean at the University of California, Riverside, and later a Vice-Chancellor. Nisbet remained in the University of California system until 1972, when he left for the University of Arizona at Tucson. Soon thereafter, he was appointed to the prestigious Albert Schweitzer Chair at Columbia.
On retiring from Columbia in 1978, Nisbet continued his scholarly work for eight years at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington D.C. In 1988, President Reagan asked him to deliver the Jefferson Lecture in Humanities, sponsored by the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Nisbet's first important work, The Quest for Community (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969) contended that modern social science's individualism denied an important human drive toward community as it left people without the aid of their fellows in combating the centralizing power of the national state.
Nisbet is seen as follower of Emile Durkheim in the understanding of modern sociocultural systems and their drift. Often identified with the political right, Nisbet began his career as a political liberal but later confessed a conversion to a kind of philosophical Conservatism
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
January 10, 2018
El artículo que leí es éste: http://www.eseade.edu.ar/files/Libert...
Frente a la opinión canónica que presenta la idea de progreso como algo que surge con la modernidad, rompiendo con la tradición, Robert Nisbet plantea que no es tan así, que la idea de progreso estuvo desde la Antigua Grecia presente, y que ya en la cristiandad con San Agustín quedó completamente definida. Pues san Agustín habla de una "educación de la raza humana", de que el mundo tiene edad como si fuera un individuo, y de un futuro utópico previo al apocalipsis. Éstas ideas serán las que los cada vez más modernos, recibiendo su herencia de unos y de otros hasta convertirse en lugar común, irán repitiendo, pero emancipándose más cada vez de su pasado cristiano. Aunque el artículo no va sólo de esto. Los antiguos griegos, a pesar de su poca historia y su idea cíclica del tiempo, también vieron que en un futuro la humanidad podría progresar, sobre todo en el terreno del conocimiento. Y, como ellos, los filósofos de la época romana. El artículo va señalando estas cosas siguiendo un orden cronológico, y en la época moderna se explaya ampliamente, hasta llegar a las calamidades del siglo XX, que también adquirieron legitimidad por dicha idea. Finalmente, acaba en el presente, pues parece que en nuestra época la idea de progreso ya se tambalea y, cuando uno la menciona, más que imaginarnos el bálsamo de Fierabrás pensamos en la intoxicación de Sancho.
En resumen, quizás lea este libro en el futuro, pues seguro que completa lo tan bien dicho en este artículo.
Frente a la opinión canónica que presenta la idea de progreso como algo que surge con la modernidad, rompiendo con la tradición, Robert Nisbet plantea que no es tan así, que la idea de progreso estuvo desde la Antigua Grecia presente, y que ya en la cristiandad con San Agustín quedó completamente definida. Pues san Agustín habla de una "educación de la raza humana", de que el mundo tiene edad como si fuera un individuo, y de un futuro utópico previo al apocalipsis. Éstas ideas serán las que los cada vez más modernos, recibiendo su herencia de unos y de otros hasta convertirse en lugar común, irán repitiendo, pero emancipándose más cada vez de su pasado cristiano. Aunque el artículo no va sólo de esto. Los antiguos griegos, a pesar de su poca historia y su idea cíclica del tiempo, también vieron que en un futuro la humanidad podría progresar, sobre todo en el terreno del conocimiento. Y, como ellos, los filósofos de la época romana. El artículo va señalando estas cosas siguiendo un orden cronológico, y en la época moderna se explaya ampliamente, hasta llegar a las calamidades del siglo XX, que también adquirieron legitimidad por dicha idea. Finalmente, acaba en el presente, pues parece que en nuestra época la idea de progreso ya se tambalea y, cuando uno la menciona, más que imaginarnos el bálsamo de Fierabrás pensamos en la intoxicación de Sancho.
En resumen, quizás lea este libro en el futuro, pues seguro que completa lo tan bien dicho en este artículo.
August 10, 2011
Published in 1980. Unlike some authors, Nisbet traces the idea of progress all the way back to the Greeks, with major contributions made by St. Augustine and others in the ancient and medieval world. In fact he devotes almost half the book to presenting the thoughts on progress by ancient and medieval thinkers. Moreover, so far he's the only historian of the idea of progress that I've read who places at least some emphasis on the contributions of Adam Smith and the American founders.
Nisbet remained an enthusiastic supporter of the continued advance of science, economics, and political freedoms to improve the lot of more and more people. I'm not nearly as optimistic as he is. We have progressed technologically and we've managed to improve the standard of living of billions of people, though billions more will never experience these fruits. Yet there is relatively little discussion of moral progress. It seems to me because there hasn't been any. Genocides, the use of technology for harmful purposes in war and the suppression of people, the degrading of the environment and slow special suicide by global warming seem to indicate, to me at least, that morally we are no more advanced than our neolithic ancestors.
One very annoying feature of the book is the lack of footnotes or references. Nisbet sometimes quotes from a book by a certain author without even mentioning the name of the book.
Nisbet remained an enthusiastic supporter of the continued advance of science, economics, and political freedoms to improve the lot of more and more people. I'm not nearly as optimistic as he is. We have progressed technologically and we've managed to improve the standard of living of billions of people, though billions more will never experience these fruits. Yet there is relatively little discussion of moral progress. It seems to me because there hasn't been any. Genocides, the use of technology for harmful purposes in war and the suppression of people, the degrading of the environment and slow special suicide by global warming seem to indicate, to me at least, that morally we are no more advanced than our neolithic ancestors.
One very annoying feature of the book is the lack of footnotes or references. Nisbet sometimes quotes from a book by a certain author without even mentioning the name of the book.
May 28, 2020
Nisbet is a superb thinker and very good writer when his subject is sociology. But as a historian, he leaves much to be hoped for. This book reads like propaganda. He stretches until thin his quotes from and interpretations of the sayings, writings and thoughts of thinkers since 6th Century Greece. He boldly interprets their thoughts to support his thesis, which appears to be that the Christian Church was the primary agency for human belief in progress, and that such belief is thoroughly imbued in contemporary culture and has been so since its earliest manifestations. Both things can be questioned. If he had not stretched so far to support his point, the book would be a light but entertaining review of the belief in human progress. When I first read it thirty years ago, I thought it was one of the best books of intellectual history I had read. (I read histories of ideas for entertainment only). I just re-read it and am wondering how I missed the weaknesses the first time.
October 13, 2007
I think this book is out of print now, but it's a pretty amazing overview of "progress"
It's fascinating to read about the development of an idea that we've taken as inevitable culturally.
That was a shitty sentence. Oh well. I'll edit in a bit. I have lots more to say about this book.
It's fascinating to read about the development of an idea that we've taken as inevitable culturally.
That was a shitty sentence. Oh well. I'll edit in a bit. I have lots more to say about this book.
January 9, 2022
Nisbet's History of the Idea of Progress is really two books in one.
Book 1 (Chapters 1-7)
The first book is excellent. It casts a wide net to catch ancient and European figures writing about historical change from the ancient world all the way until 1900. Nisbet must have done years of research to be able to summarize and synthesize the views of dozens of ancient, medieval, and pre-modern writers on the topic of progress. For an overview of the development of the idea of progress in "Western" thought over this period, I cannot believe that anything more comprehensive exists.
Nisbet's overarching argument is that in the ancient world there were those who thought that history was cyclical -- sometimes even believing that history plays itself over and over again like a song on repeat -- and those who thought that history was progressive. Proponents of both historical narratives continued to exist throughout the middle ages. Sometimes the cyclical accounts were dominant (surprisingly Nisbet flags the Renaissance as such a period), and sometimes the progressive perspectives were at the fore, as in the Reformation in the 17th and early 18th century. Starting in the mid-18th century, however, progress became the dominant thread in understanding the world, tying together all sorts of political, economic, and sociological thought.
When one reads academic texts, sometimes one can smell the gunpowder from the battles outside. When Nisbet argues that ancient writers thought of history as progressive as much as they thought of it as cyclical, it seems he is arguing against other academics who think the ancients purely thought of history as cyclical. When Nisbet says that the Renaissance was a period in which people gave up on historical progress, he may be playing a contrarian to scholars who find the roots of the enlightenment belief in progress there. As a non-expert, the fact that there are presumably well-read people who hold other views makes me a smidgen less confident in Nisbet's conclusions.
Book 2: Chapters 8-Epilogue
The second book is Nisbet's opinions and predictions about the current state and future of both the idea of progress, and actual progress. This book is comically wrong about nearly everything. From Nisbet's view in 1980, it predicts among other things that people will stop learning about history, that the United States will lose its influence in the world (a few years after the book was published the Soviet Union fell), and the masses will lose interest in technological change and even life itself. More to the point, Nisbet predicts that people will stop believing in progress. My casual observation is that the opposite has happened. Many people believe that technology is driving history. My son asked me today if I think that I will live long enough to see flying cars. Techno-optimism and futurism are alive and well.
In the Epilogue, the clearly religious Nisbet argues that the only way to restore the belief in progress in Europe and the United States is through a Christian revival. He sees signs that this will happen. Nisbet thinks that European society was able to ride on the coattails of religion for awhile, but if Christianity does not take a stronger place in society, Nisbet predicts the end of both the belief in progress and the slow death of civilization itself.
Book 1 (Chapters 1-7)
The first book is excellent. It casts a wide net to catch ancient and European figures writing about historical change from the ancient world all the way until 1900. Nisbet must have done years of research to be able to summarize and synthesize the views of dozens of ancient, medieval, and pre-modern writers on the topic of progress. For an overview of the development of the idea of progress in "Western" thought over this period, I cannot believe that anything more comprehensive exists.
Nisbet's overarching argument is that in the ancient world there were those who thought that history was cyclical -- sometimes even believing that history plays itself over and over again like a song on repeat -- and those who thought that history was progressive. Proponents of both historical narratives continued to exist throughout the middle ages. Sometimes the cyclical accounts were dominant (surprisingly Nisbet flags the Renaissance as such a period), and sometimes the progressive perspectives were at the fore, as in the Reformation in the 17th and early 18th century. Starting in the mid-18th century, however, progress became the dominant thread in understanding the world, tying together all sorts of political, economic, and sociological thought.
When one reads academic texts, sometimes one can smell the gunpowder from the battles outside. When Nisbet argues that ancient writers thought of history as progressive as much as they thought of it as cyclical, it seems he is arguing against other academics who think the ancients purely thought of history as cyclical. When Nisbet says that the Renaissance was a period in which people gave up on historical progress, he may be playing a contrarian to scholars who find the roots of the enlightenment belief in progress there. As a non-expert, the fact that there are presumably well-read people who hold other views makes me a smidgen less confident in Nisbet's conclusions.
Book 2: Chapters 8-Epilogue
The second book is Nisbet's opinions and predictions about the current state and future of both the idea of progress, and actual progress. This book is comically wrong about nearly everything. From Nisbet's view in 1980, it predicts among other things that people will stop learning about history, that the United States will lose its influence in the world (a few years after the book was published the Soviet Union fell), and the masses will lose interest in technological change and even life itself. More to the point, Nisbet predicts that people will stop believing in progress. My casual observation is that the opposite has happened. Many people believe that technology is driving history. My son asked me today if I think that I will live long enough to see flying cars. Techno-optimism and futurism are alive and well.
In the Epilogue, the clearly religious Nisbet argues that the only way to restore the belief in progress in Europe and the United States is through a Christian revival. He sees signs that this will happen. Nisbet thinks that European society was able to ride on the coattails of religion for awhile, but if Christianity does not take a stronger place in society, Nisbet predicts the end of both the belief in progress and the slow death of civilization itself.
August 26, 2008
Amazing how idea of progress goes back to Greeks and Romans -- had the idea that progress was natural before there WAS much progress of any kind! One of the best history of idea books ever!
September 10, 2012
Very interesting read. Nisbet attributes ideas to Augustine that rightfully ought to be given to Scripture, but does credit Augustine with being the font of Western philosophy hence forward.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews