PROGRESS argument
1. Argument of Progress
By definition, “progress moves forward”; the progress argument evaluates the most recent as the best. If F1 and F2 are in the same category, and if F2 comes after F1, then F2 is preferable to F1.
The progress argument rejects the authority of elders and their practices, which are considered outdated; the contemporary practices that follow their model are dismissed as regressive, even repulsive.
Cats are no longer burned on cathedral forecourts, animal fights were outlawed in 1833, owls are no longer nailed to barn doors, and rats are no longer crucified as targets for darts. Whatever may be said in bullfighting circles, bullfighting with killing is doomed. (Le Monde, Sept. 21-22, 1986)
The argument is organized around the following operations.
– First, bullfighting is classified as a case of animal abuse, which puts it in the same category as burning cats, organizing cockfights, nailing owls to doors and crucifying rats.
– In a second step, the practices belonging to this category are listed in the chronological order in which they disappeared.
– This line of facts is then extrapolated to conclude that bullfighting should also be condemned in the face of social progress — and the sooner the better.
2. Argument of Novelty
Latin ad novitatem; novitas, “novelty; condition of a man who, as the first of his family, attains an eminent position (senator)” (Gaffiot [1934], Novitas). Novitas is opposed to nobilitas. Its argumentative orientation can be positive (the dynamic of the novitas is opposed to the decadent nobilitas), or negative: the homo novus, the “new man” who comes from nowhere, is suspected.
2.1 Traditional Orientation
The argument of progress reverses the traditional view of the higher esteem accorded to the ancients, especially in the religious sphere: “the novitas is the index of heresy” (Le Brun 2011, §1). The argumentative orientation of the judgment “this is a novelty!” is reversed.
The argument of progress is opposed to the argument of the decline of civilizations, which attributes all virtues to the ancients.
2.2 Contemporary Orientation
The contemporary interpretation combines the argument of novelty with the argument of progress: “What just came out” is “super” exciting, and “déjà vu” is of little value. This argument values innovation over routine, and the new over the old. It underlies the call:
Be the first to adopt it!
According to this rule, the recently published manual would necessarily be better than its predecessors, and, in politics, the newest candidate is already seen as the much-needed savior.
The syzygy is a different vision of progress, as a passage from an imperfect world to a perfect and unchanging one.
3. Ancients and Moderns
The argument of progress structures the eternal dispute between Ancients and Moderns. In its radical form, the argument affirms the absolute superiority of the latter over the former, both in the of arts and culture and in the sciences. Ultimately, this superiority would be that of the modern individual over his or her ancestors. In a relativized form, the argument of progress is compatible with the individual superiority of the ancients, “we are dwarfs on the shoulders of the giants”, not taller, but able to see further. This is classically refuted by the objection that the lice on the head of the giant’s head cannot see any further than the giant.