
Phenomenologically, in fact, progress is a change that is both perceived and evaluated, as well as having a policy is deemed necessary or desirable, for improvement with respect to what precedes it. However, since
consciousness perceives and evaluates it as something that has not yet revealed but it is only just about to be revealed, it is in fact the phenomenon of anticipation. The progress that is inscribed in the consciousness as a precursor of an act related evaluation. This is not a thing to evaluate and therefore an object of value, but a movement that, in the dialectic of time, can be defined in the future so that will be or has been "after" than a "before" which is the beginning and its premise. So even when we judge in retrospect that in a given field there was a progress, progress is the "after" for a condition front that was or could be improved. It is in fact a result and, as such, can only be defined in a prophetic and projective or, alternatively, only when the change is made.
Just because it is not something tangible, but the ghost of an estimate or opinion of value given retrospectively to a portion of history, it can be called an "idea" and in the sense of vision in the sense of class under the subsume phenomena which have a continuity and, therefore, a complex like those of a "change improvement."
This idea, similar to other terms that preserve the Latin prefix 'pro' secondary from the greek 'pros' as a process, procedure, property, production, design, promotion, marketing and the like, indicate a relationship of complete motion from the specific 'advantage' that the movement itself was in close. The advantage is primarily achieved stability or order: the fact that the weather can be sorted by an ultimate criterion.
There are indeed cases of rupture: the movement indicated is continuous and is articulated to the final change. There are no jumps or breaks deep trauma or those that invoke the idea of \u200b\u200banother time or another story as possible. The conclusion is unique compared to a continuous motion.

Il progresso indica dunque una progressione geometrica da un punto all’altro del tempo storico secondo quella prevalutazione etica, politica, scientifica o economica chiamata miglioramento. In questo senso esso prefigura un ordine secondo un vantaggio: esso va a governare, a partire da un presente anticipatore, cose future individuando quale sia la direzione giusta che lasci intravedere il risultato positivo dello sforzo comune. Il progresso viene indicato retoricamente nel momento del suo inizio: lì, when the movement is barely emerges the hypothesis (stated as a thesis) of "progress": that progress is being, or that progress is possible. As Ricoeur points out, the progress makes it imperative optative and then the availability of history as progress can be indicated when it is not only desirable but necessary for all who are involved.
Yet we should ask ourselves: is there really is something that can be called progress? Something that should be in a better direction? And what exactly is this better? An increase in quantity? In a qualitative change? In a total enrichment? And compared to what?
It 'clear that a first term can be judged better or worse in its dynamism only in relation to another term, but what are these terms? Sections of time? Historical moments? Individuals? Substances? Peoples? Whole societies? Which category should be ascribed to the alleged quality of progress? The claim
protoilluminista was to think that progress could be ascribed to all humankind, understood in its history. The idea of \u200b\u200bprogress has thus been ascribed to the universality of humanity. 'Progress' and 'humanity' are actually two abstract terms to the second power (because abstract in turn from abstractions). The first abstracts from a very precise idea of \u200b\u200bthe time-motion value to its conclusion, the second abstract idea of \u200b\u200bman or human essence, the theoretical result that there is a "humanity" universally understood, beyond the differences, the stories divergent and individual uniqueness. Both at the same time, however, inherent in something concrete: the concretion of time in human history, the evolution of species.
0 comments:
Post a Comment