CHAPTER 5

Human Flourishing
as Reflected in
Progress and
development
How do we know that we are progressing? What are the
indicators of development? More often than not, development
is equated with growth and greater consumption.
The more that a population is
able to consume, the
wealthier it is. Likewise, the
more that a person is able to
buy stuff, the higher he/she
is on the development scale.
 What is human flourishing? Eastern and western conceptions
regarding society and human flourishing seem to differ: western
civilization seemed to be more individualistic (exemplified by the
Aristotelian view of a good life) while eastern civilizations are more
centered on the community (such as the Chinese and Japanese
emphasis on learning for the greater good). However, in the context
of globalization, this apparent difference in perspectives seems to
disappear. However, it is important to note that human flourishing is
still given focus.
  
 According to Bandarlipe, et al. (2019), the following are some
characteristics of human flourishing:
 All humans aim to flourish.
 Human flourishing involves putting into action one’s capacities,
capabilities, and virtues.
 Human flourishing depends on free will.
 Human flourishing is sustained over time.
 Human flourishing involves doing well in broad domains of human life.
 Humans have attained certain
progresses that we lack before.
Mortality rates are lowered due to less
death due to diseases and childbirth.
Life spans have increased because of
better medical care and health
conditions. Literacy rates also
increased through better access to
education and more alternatives or
modes of learning. Productivity has also
increased, though differing in levels in
many countries, which increased food
supply and income of families.
 However, determining the ways on how to
attain a flourishing human life is not an
easy endeavor, especially in the context of
science and technology. Though, as from
previous lessons, we have learned that
science and technology are instrumental
in human flourishing, some may say that
overdependence to the point in deifying
science may pose a threat to human
flourishing.
 
 Growth has been the main object of development
for the past 70 years, despite the fact that it is not
working. Orthodox economists insist that all we
need is yet more growth. More progressive types tell us that
we need to shift some of the yields of growth from the richer
segment of the population to the poorer ones, evening
things out a bit.
At current levels of average global consumption,
we’re overshooting our planet’s bio-capacity by
more than 50% each year.
In other words, growth isn’t an option
anymore – we’ve already grown too much.
Scientists are now telling us that were
blowing past planetary boundaries at
breakneck speed. And the hard truth is that
this global crisis is due almost entirely to
overconsumption in rich countries.
 Economist Peter Edward argues that
instead of pushing poorer countries to
“catch up” with rich ones, we should
thinking to get rich countries to “catch
down” to more appropriate level of
development. We should look at societies
where people live long and happy lives
relatively low levels of income consumption
not as basket cases that need to be
developed towards western models, but as
exemplars of efficient living.
 In light of this, perhaps we should regard such
countries not as underdeveloped, but rather as
appropriately developed. And maybe we need to
start calling on rich countries to justify their
excesses
 The idea of “de-
developing” rich countries
might be prove to be a
strong rallying cry in the
global south. But it will be
tricky to sell to
westerners. Tricky, but
now impossible. According
to recent consumer
research.
 People sense there is something wrong with the
dominant model of economic progress and they
hungry for an alternative narrative.
 The problem is that the pundits.
Promoting this kind of transition are
using the wrong language. They use
terms such as de-growth, zero growth
or worst of all de-development. Which
are technically accurate but off-putting
for everyone who’s not ready for board.
Such terms are repulsive because they
run against the deepest frames we use
to thing about human progress, and
indeed, this purpose of life itself. It’s like
asking people to stop moving
positively thorough life, to stop
learning, improving, growing.
 Perhaps we might take a cue from Latin
Americans, who are organizing alternative
visions around the indigenous concept of
buenvivir, or good living. The west has its own
tradition of reflection on the good life and its
time we revive. Robert and Edward
Skidelsky take us down
this road in his book, how
much is enough? Where
they lay out the possibility
of interventions such as
banning advertising, a
shorter working week and
a basic income, all of
which would improve our
lives while reducing
consumption.
 Either we slow down voluntarily or climate
change will do it for us. We cant go on ignoring
the law of nature. But rethinking our theory of
progress is not only an ecological imperative,
it is also a development one. If we do not act
soon, all our hard – won gains against poverty
will evaporate, as food system collapse and
mass famine re – emerges to an extent not
seen since the 19th century.
 This is not about giving up. And it’s
certainly now about living a life of
voluntary misery or imposing harsh limits
on human potential on contrary, it’s about
reaching a higher level of understanding
and consciousness about we’re doing
here and why.
 To learn more about this threat of science to human flourishing, watch the
documentary film The Magician's Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case against
Scientism (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPeyJvXU68k ).

 Video Analysis 
 After watching the documentary and reflecting on its connection to human
flourishing, write a 300 -500-word analysis of the documentary by answer
the following questions:
 What is scientism? Why was Lewis against it?
 Science was compared science to magic in three ways: as religion, as
credulity, and as power. Explain his comparison for each case.
 Based on what you have learned in the documentary film, what is the
presented principle of modernity and its values in the magician’s twin?
 How does scientism threaten the human person thriving in science and
technology? Why should science adhere to a moral basis that is not
dictated by science itself?
  
 Your work will be graded using the following criteria:
  4 3 2 1
Depth of Content Demonstrates a Demonstrates a Demonstrates a basic Lacks understanding
comprehensive comprehensive understanding of the of the subject.
understanding of the understanding of the subject.
subject and work can subject.
be used as an
example for others.

Originality and Work is original and all Work is original and Work is somewhat Work is unoriginal and
Completeness questions were some questions were original and some most questions were
answered properly. answered properly. questions were not answered properly.
answered properly.

Style and Clarity Ideas are clearly Ideas are clearly Ideas show some Ideas are not
articulated and well articulated and well degree of clarity but communicated clearly
developed. developed. are not well nor are they well
developed. developed.

Organization and Writing is well- Writing is well- Writing has some Writing is unorganized
Grammar organized with no organized with few degree of organization and contains many
spelling and spelling and with some spelling spelling and
grammatical errors. grammatical errors. and grammatical grammatical errors.
errors.

Timeliness Completed work was Completed work was Completed work was Completed work was
passed earlier than passed on the passed the day after passed more than a
the deadline given. deadline given. the deadline given. day after the deadline
given.
THE CONCEPT OF DE-DEVELOPMENT
 After watching the video, one could legitimately question
whether humans are really flourishing in the present time.
 Jason Hickel, an anthropologist at the London School of
Economics, also questioned this in the context of
economics.
 Recent reports show that the gap between developed and
developing countries continues to widen.
 There is also an unclear way on how to measure these
gaps.
 Many solutions have been put forward to attain this and to
really determine whether we are flourishing. Jason Hickel
proposed a solution that is different from what is usually
thought of.
 In his article Forget ‘developing’ poor countries, it’s time to de-
develop rich countries, he looked into poverty and how current
measures in eradicating this global problem fails and instead
the gap between rich and poor countries are continuing to
widen.
 He questions the need for continuing growth and how this
growth negatively affects countries.
 He also introduced the concept of de-development as a way of
bridging the gap between countries of different levels of
development.
 To learn more about his ideas regarding human flourishing and de-development, read the
article using this link: https://www.theguardian.com/global-
development-professionals-network/2015/sep/23/developing-
poor-countries-de-develop-rich-countries-sdgs
 Reaction Paper
  
 After reading the article, write a 300 – 500 word reaction paper
regarding Hickel’s article. In your paper, make sure that you answer
the following questions:
 What does “de-development” mean? How is it different from the
traditional notions of progress?
 How do you feel about the term “de-development”? Do you feel that
it is counterintuitive for the concept of human flourishing and
progress?
 Why must we alter our standard of development and consumption to
that of “de-development”?
 What is the centrality of human flourishing to science and
innovation?
 Do you agree on his views regarding progress and development and
how to measure them? Why or why not?
  
  4 3 2 1

Depth of Content Demonstrates  a  Demonstrates  a  Demonstrates  a  basic  Lacks  understanding 

comprehensive  comprehensive  understanding  of  the  of  the  subject  for 
understanding  of  the  understanding  of  the  subject for reflection. reflection.
subject  for  reflection  subject for reflection.
and work can be used 
as  an  example  for 
others.

Originality and Work is original and all  Work  is  original  and  Work  is  somewhat  Work is  unoriginal and 
Completeness questions  were  some  questions  were  original  and  some  most  questions  were 
answered properly. answered properly. questions  were  not answered properly.
answered properly.

Style and Clarity Ideas  are  clearly  Ideas  are  clearly  Ideas  show  some  Ideas  are  not 
articulated  and  well  articulated  and  well  degree  of  clarity  but  communicated  clearly 
developed.  developed. are  not  well  nor  are  they  well 
developed. developed.

Organization and Writing  is  well- Writing  is  well- Writing  has  some  Writing  is  unorganized 
Grammar organized  with  no  organized  with  few  degree  of  organization  and  contains  many 
spelling  and  spelling  and  with some spelling and  spelling  and 
grammatical errors. grammatical errors. grammatical errors. grammatical errors.

Timeliness Completed  work  was  Completed  work  was  Completed  work  was  Completed  work  was 
passed  earlier  than  passed  on  the  passed  the  day  after  passed  more  than  a 
the deadline given. deadline given. the deadline given. day  after  the  deadline 
given.
END…..

THANK YOU!!!