Monday, May 19, 2008



How quickly can society advance? Can knowledge keep up with technology? What can we afford to leave behind and forget to reach our goals more efficiently?

Morals are open to debate, they are inefficient and bog down progress; they are costly. The Constitution of the United States of America is filled with laws steeped in morals. For the sake of progress the Fore Fathers are being silenced.

Progress = profit.

The more quickly progress can be attained, the faster our gratification can be realized.

If a few people die on the job, their deaths are an acceptable cost to so long as productivity output has not been significantly affected; the work force is designed to quickly fill gaps in production lines where needed. It is better to allow lower-class workforce participants to succumb to illness or legal prosecution rather than the upper echelons of a corporation because of the ease of replacement. The corporate chairmen are able to push progression ever faster while the average worker has little influence over economical and societal events.

It makes sense that the elite in society can provide for themselves and are sustained by the highest medical treatments in the world while the average worker who becomes ill will be allowed to suffer. The elite cannot be so easily replaced as the worker. The elite have knowledge and influence, power to control events, and easy access to world governments. The worker on the other hand has nothing substantial in comparison; debt, sickness, and complaints. The worker is apt to debate morals, the elite would rather make laws.

Laws circumvent the moral debate. While there are instances where laws have caused some debate, it is largely accurate to say that laws are preferred for lack of discussion. Gun control is a very good example that illustrates the issue. Between federal, state, and local jurisdictions, there are several thousand individually different laws to circumvent the very simple moral that people should not kill each other. The moral taken by itself allows for endless debate; maybe there is a time to kill, perhaps only certain people should be allowed to do the killing; what if certain people need to die? Then there is the question of how and where killing should be done; should people be allowed to use guns to kill with? What about defending a home? Perhaps anyone can kill, but only certain people should do so with guns. Should every home be armed with guns or only certain qualifying people?

The debate can go on and on, slowing any progress that might be influenced by the discussion.

The thousands of laws speed up the process tremendously. By law, a person knows if they can have a gun and where they can use it. By law, a person knows whom they can use a gun against and when to do so. There is no debate. The law answers all questions. The law speeds up all discourse about a subject or ideal so that a society can move on.

The speed at which a society can progress is currently only slowed by the development process of technology. Acceleration of technological development has been increasing for decades at the loss of many simple morals in favor of so many laws even the law makers require entire rooms full of legal books.

We have lost much in the name of progress, seemingly for little gain. Much of our modern technology is only the acceleration of progress; faster communications, faster transportation, and faster labor. In the United States of America we are now seeing some of the cost of this progress.

Our infrastructure has suffered tremendously, education is failing at all levels, and the family construct is fractured.

Is there a goal to this mad rush for progress? How much longer can we endure this reckless, breakneck pace? How much more are we willing to give up for it?

No comments: