And yes, I think thatās a fair point. (David also said the same when giving feedback.) This is why I write:
Also note that weāre using āprogressā here as a neutral descriptor, referring to something that could be good or could be bad; the positive connotations that the term often has should be set aside.
I think that if I could unilaterally and definitively decide on the terms, Iād go with ādifferential technological developmentā (so keep that one the same), ādifferential intellectual developmentā, and ādifferential developmentā. I.e., Iād skip the word āprogressā, because weāre really talking about something more like ālasting changesā, without the positive connotations.
But I arrived a little late to set the terms myself :D
I.e., the term ādifferential intellectual progressā is already somewhat established, as is ādifferential progressā, though to a slightly lesser extent. Itās not absolutely too late to change them, but Iād worry about creating confusion by doing so, especially in a summary-style post like this.
However, it is true that my specific examples include some things that sound particularly not like progress at all, such as spread of nationalism and egoism. In contrast, Muehlhauser and Salamonās examples of ārisk-increasing progressā sound more like the sort of thing people might regularly call āprogressā, but that theyāre highlighting could increase risks.
My current thinking is that how Iāve sliced things up (into something like lasting changes in techs, then lasting changes in ideas, then lasting changes of any sort) does feel most natural, and that the way that this makes the usage of the term āprogressā confusing is a price worth paying.
But Iām not certain of that, and would be interested in othersā thoughts on that too.
I think that if I could unilaterally and definitively decide on the terms, Iād go with ādifferential technological developmentā (so keep that one the same), ādifferential intellectual developmentā, and ādifferential developmentā. I.e., Iād skip the word āprogressā, because weāre really talking about something more like ālasting changesā, without the positive connotations.
I agree, ādevelopmentā seems like a superior word to reduce ambiguities. But as you say, this is a summary post, so it might not the best place to suggest switching up terms.
Hereās two long form alternatives to ādifferential progressā/āādifferential developmentā: differential societal development, differential civilizational development.
Thanks!
And yes, I think thatās a fair point. (David also said the same when giving feedback.) This is why I write:
I think that if I could unilaterally and definitively decide on the terms, Iād go with ādifferential technological developmentā (so keep that one the same), ādifferential intellectual developmentā, and ādifferential developmentā. I.e., Iād skip the word āprogressā, because weāre really talking about something more like ālasting changesā, without the positive connotations.
But I arrived a little late to set the terms myself :D
I.e., the term ādifferential intellectual progressā is already somewhat established, as is ādifferential progressā, though to a slightly lesser extent. Itās not absolutely too late to change them, but Iād worry about creating confusion by doing so, especially in a summary-style post like this.
However, it is true that my specific examples include some things that sound particularly not like progress at all, such as spread of nationalism and egoism. In contrast, Muehlhauser and Salamonās examples of ārisk-increasing progressā sound more like the sort of thing people might regularly call āprogressā, but that theyāre highlighting could increase risks.
My current thinking is that how Iāve sliced things up (into something like lasting changes in techs, then lasting changes in ideas, then lasting changes of any sort) does feel most natural, and that the way that this makes the usage of the term āprogressā confusing is a price worth paying.
But Iām not certain of that, and would be interested in othersā thoughts on that too.
I agree, ādevelopmentā seems like a superior word to reduce ambiguities. But as you say, this is a summary post, so it might not the best place to suggest switching up terms.
Hereās two long form alternatives to ādifferential progressā/āādifferential developmentā: differential societal development, differential civilizational development.