Vrije Universiteit Brussel

CLEA Study Group: Cognitive and Social Progress

Present members:

Jan Bernheim

Elyanne.VanHolle@UCB-Group.com

Francis Heylighen

CLEA

Ruut Veenhoven

Veenhoven@SOC.FSW.eur.nl

Robert Scott Gassler

Goals

to study the relations between the on-going "cognitive revolution", as exemplified by the worldwide increase in education levels and intelligence of the population, and other measures of social progress, such as increases in health, life-expectancy, wealth, quality of life, peace, life-satisfaction, happiness, etc.
to counter the claims of the relativists (who deny the objective existence of progress) and the pessimists (who believe things are getting worse)
thus, to develop a progressive world view

The research project below, which was submitted by the study group to a funding agency, proposes some more details about this approach. Further background information about the general theme of progress can be found in an excerpt from a book being prepared by F. Heylighen

Progress in global quality of life and its indicators: an interdisciplinary approach

1. Aim

On the basis of their earlier research in different disciplines, the promoters of the project have reached the conclusion that the quality of life (QOL) of the world population appears to increase together with the increasing development. The present project wishes to investigate: 1) whether this is effectively true, 2) which are the underlying causes of this development and, 3) in how far the contributing factors can be represented quantitatively in a multi-factorial model.

2. Objectives

The concept of "progress", as posited by the 18th century Enlightenment, has recently been questioned. On the one hand, the philosophy of postmodernism has emphasised the relativity of good and evil, and therefore the relativity of progress. On the other hand, the new phenomenon of unrelenting information about negative developments, such as pollution, unemployment, war and corruption, has reduced people's confidence in the future. An erosion of our belief in progress may be dangerous because it may lead to stagnation, conservatism and particularism. It manifests itself as a widespread culture pessimism and a feeling of hopelessness.

Yet, when we look at the world as a whole, it turns out that variables such as life expectancy, wealth, and education level show a consistently positive evolution (Simon, 1995). The same applies for combined indicators, such as the "Human Development Index" (UNDP, 1996), the "Physical Quality of Life Index", or the "International Index of Social Progress" (Estes, 1984).

One must ask the question whether such indicators represent global progress, rather than an arbitrary or ideologically biased selection of factors, which are not representative for what people really experience as important. For example, in how far is increase in GNP to be considered as progress, if it is accompanied by increase in pollution and resource exhaustion? The basic question concerns values: what is to be considered as good and what as evil? The answer to this question is intrinsically subjective, and apparently it cannot be derived from objective facts. Therefore, we propose to use the appreciation by the subjects themselves as a yardstick, and define progress operationally as increase in the subjectively experienced, global quality of life (QOL) (Bernheim, 1995).

The project wishes to: 1) investigate in how far progress, defined as such, has taken place for the world population over the last decades; 2) identify the main components of this progress, together with the domains where there has been no progress or even regression; 3) on the basis of these data and an evolutionary framework, try to understand the causes and mechanisms of this development.

3. Design and methodology

Decades of research (Veenhoven, 1995) have shown that the subjective appreciation of life can be measured in a relatively valid and reliable way. Various methods for assessing in how far people are "happy" or "satisfied" with their life turn out to produce largely similar results. The simplest method consists in asking a subject to score his or life on a scale which goes from "best possible" to "worst possible". Such techniques can be further refined by using the ACSA (Anamnestic Comparative Self-Assessment) method developed by us (Bernheim & Buyse, 1984), where the scale goes from the best to the worst personal experience. This avoids comparing one's own life satisfaction with external standards.

In spite of the fact that QOL is intrinsically subjective and that every measurement method has flaws, the results of such measurements appear unexpectedly reliable, in the sense that they allow the prediction of objective properties of the subject or the society. For example, subjective QOL turns out to be significantly higher in societies that are economically and socially more developed. The data from the "World Database of Happiness" have been correlated with dozens of objective sociological, economical and psychological variables (Veenhoven, 1994). Some of these variables (e.g. average purchasing power, access to information, gender equality) appear to have a significant correlation with QOL (R > 0,6; p < 0,05) , while others (e.g. unemployment level, number of suicides, energy consumption) show little or no correlation (Veenhoven, 1995, 1996). These differential correlations allow us to make an empirically based selection of significant variables, which are less vulnerable to the criticism of being arbitrary or ideologically biased.

The project will try to establish in how far these selected factors show progress for the world as a whole. In order to achieve that, we will need to collect sufficient statistical data for each of the variables, over the period of (at least) the last 50 years, and this for a representative group of countries. For part of this material, we can make use of the many data gathered by the groups around Simon (1995) and Estes (1984). In addition, we will consult the databases of various national and international organisations, such as UNO, UNESCO, UNDP (1996), WHO, IMF, the World Bank, etc.

More fundamentally, we wish to infer a quantitative model of QOL, which expresses subjective life appreciation as a combination of objective factors. Such a model can be developed by applying multivariate analysis and logistic regression to the different variables, with subjective QOL as the dependent variable. This would allow us to determine the weights of the different variables in the overall QOL. It will also be important to quantify the remaining variation, which cannot be derived from objective factors. This remaining variation will determine the relative contribution of factors that are difficult to control or to measure objectively, such as culture, mentality or climate.

In addition, we can use principal components factor analysis to derive a general factor which explains a maximum of variation between different countries or within the same country at different moments. On the basis of our working hypothesis, we expect that this will produce a general "development index", which is correlated with QOL. Such an index would allow us to measure the "rate" of development for different countries, and therefore help us to determine the circumstances (e.g. war, recession, innovation) which tend to accelerate or slow down development. On the other hand, the differences between the development index and the QOL dimension will help us to determine the domains in which development deviates from QOL increase, and thus allow us to test the theses of those who criticise the idea of progress on the basis of our data.

In order to analyse the mechanisms and causes of observed progress we wish to make use of a generalised theory of evolution, inspired by recent development in the domains of non-linear systems, cognitive sciences and self-organization. We distinguish three fundamental mechanisms: 1) natural selection, because of which negative developments tend to be eventually eliminated; 2) growth of knowledge, which allows the anticipation of positive and negative effects. This would promote a planned progress, which is much more efficient than the blind variation which normally provides the substrate for natural selection; 3) positive feedback or synergy, where progress in one domain (e.g. wealth or technology) creates resources and opens up new possibilities for progress in another domain (e.g. education or health), which in turn benefits the former domain. These evolutionary mechanisms produce an increasing complexification of society (Heylighen & Campbell, 1995; Heylighen, 1998), characterised by increased efficiency, adaptiveness, and control over the environment. The indicators of progress developed by the project will allow us to better analyse the role of these and other mechanism in specific cases.

Collaboration and co-ordination

The group around R. Veenhoven will focus on the analysis of the objective factors that are correlated with QOL, the group around J. Bernheim on the measurement of subjective QOL and on the role of the growth of knowledge (the "cognitive revolution"), the group around R. S. Gassler on the economic and political factors in the development process and the one around F. Heylighen on the general mechanisms underlying progress. The project will be co-ordinated by the study group "Progress" of the interdisciplinary Centre Leo Apostel. This study group includes, besides the project promoters, a number of other experts, representing the different disciplines in which progress can be observed. The study group aims to publish the first results of the project by the year 2000 with an international publisher, as a book with contributions by the different participants. In addition, seminars will be organised in which the preliminary results are put up for discussion.

References

Bernheim J., Buyse M. (1984). "Anamnestic Comparative Self Assessment (ACSA): A method to measure the subjective quality of life of cancer patients". J. Psychosoc. Oncol. 1, p. 25-38,

Bernheim J. (1995): "Quality of life, or qualities of life? A critique, and a plea for emphasized global assessment of QOL", Quality of Life Research 3 , p. 155-156.

Estes R. (1984): The Social Progress of Nations. (New York: Praeger) .

Heylighen F. & Campbell D.T. (1995): ÒSelection of Organization at the Social LevelÓ, World Futures: the Journal of General Evolution 45, p. 181-212.

Heylighen F. (1998): "The Growth of Structural and Functional Complexity during Evolution", in: F. Heylighen & D. Aerts (eds.) (1998): "The Evolution of Complexity" (Kluwer, Dordrecht) (ter perse).

Simon J. L. (ed.) (1995) The State of Humanity (Blackwell, Oxford, 1995).

United Nations Development Programme (1996): Human Development Report (Oxford University Press, New York).

Veenhoven R. (1994) Correlates of Happiness: 7838 findings from 603 studies in 69 nations 1911-1994 (3 volumes), RISBO, Series Studies in Social and Cultural Transformation, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 2028 pages.

Veenhoven R. (1995): "Developments in Satisfaction Research", Social Indicators Research 37, p. 1-46.

Veenhoven R. (1996): "Happy life-expectancy. A comprehensive measure of quality-of-life in nations", Social Indicators Research, vol 39, p. 1-58.

General: Julian L. Simon's optimistic view of population and resources; Writings by Julian L. Simon Available on WWW; Quality of Life; World Database of Happiness; IS Quality of Life Studies; John McCarthy's web site on Progress and its sustainability; World Health Organization
IQ raise
Development Trends