Editorial: Man and Technics. The West’s Incomplete Destiny

While many view progress as a steady accumulation of technological and social advancements, history may suggest a more nuanced picture—one that questions whether progress can ever be universally defined or controlled.

The Illusion of Uninterrupted Advancement

Western thought has long been dominated by a belief in limitless progress, a vision deeply embedded in the intellectual traditions of the Enlightenment and industrial modernity. This belief assumes that history is a linear ascent toward greater freedom, knowledge, and prosperity. Yet, as thinkers like Oswald Spengler and Arnold Toynbee have argued, civilisations do not follow a singular trajectory of continuous improvement. Rather, they rise and fall, shaped by internal cultural dynamics and external pressures.

Technology, often seen as the hallmark of progress, exemplifies this cyclical nature. While knowledge and inventions accumulate across generations, their practical implementation depends on the societal conditions of the time. The ancient Greeks already built highly intricate devices predicting astronomical movements (such as the Antikythera mechanism) and conceptualised steam engines, yet they never made practical use of them. The Chinese developed gunpowder centuries before the West, yet it was Europe that weaponised it, revolutionising the nature of warfare. Even civilisations that had the wheel did not always see the necessity of its full application, as in pre-Columbian America. Progress, then, is not merely a function of knowledge but also of cultural will and necessity.

Cultural Foundations of Progress

The way a civilisation conceptualises itself profoundly influences its approach to progress. Some cultures, like the Romans and Greeks in classical antiquity, were more static, valuing harmony and balance over radical transformation. In contrast, Western civilisation, particularly since the Middle Ages, has exhibited a relentless drive toward innovation—what Spengler termed the ”Faustian spirit.” This obsessive pursuit of expansion, discovery, and technological mastery defines Western progress, yet it also bears the seeds of its own dissolution.

Every civilisation moves through phases: an initial phase of spiritual and artistic flourishing, followed by an era of material expansion, and ultimately a period of stagnation or decline, usually associated with the large civilisation-states that appear towards the end of the cycle, such as the Roman Empire or the Han Empire. The West is probably no exception. Its technological boom, particularly in the last five centuries, coincided with a shift away from religious and metaphysical worldviews toward an increasingly secular, rationalist paradigm. This transformation, while it has brought extraordinary advancements, also created a profound existential malaise.

The Limits of Technological Progress

The modern world equates a functioning society with inevitable technological advancement, yet the past shows that societies can stagnate or collapse despite peace and high levels of technical knowledge. The Roman Empire, for instance, possessed advanced engineering and administrative capabilities, yet rapidly lost its resilience and fell victim to economic, social, and military crises. Arguably, the Roman Republic, only some centuries earlier, would have been able to resist these without much trouble. Thus, the pace of today’s technological acceleration will not necessarily continue; it could very well be the final sprint before exhaustion sets in.

But such an end could very well be a desired outcome. Indeed, the ideology of progressivism, which champions unending scientific and social advancement, often overlooks the question of whether such advancements improve human well-being. Innovations in artificial intelligence, genetic modification, nuclear energy, and automation promise unprecedented possibilities, but they also raise ethical dilemmas while stoking fears of dehumanisation.

Many European institutions are already calling for tight control of these modern technologies—a self-limitation that is typical of late civilisations and that could bring about the very breakdown it seeks to avoid. For the time being, the US is still refusing such self-doubt to haunt its psyche, but it may only be a matter of time before it catches up with Europe. Moreover, we should not forget the looming risk of technological overreach: that critical stage when the slightest crisis can lead a civilisation that has lost its resilience to a setback not of years but of decades, perhaps even centuries.

Expansion as Destiny

Is material expansion and economic accumulation the West’s only way forward—a headlong rush until a final tipping point is reached when this civilisation will either destroy itself or be destroyed by others (using its very own technology against it)?

Though such a process could still take many generations, comparative history suggests it is ultimately inevitable, as would be technological stagnation, similar to the one that set in at the beginning of the Roman Empire. As for other civilisations, their adoption of Western technology may be an option rather than a destiny, based on imitation instead of independentdevelopment—“a weapon like a tree branch in the woods that one throws away when it has served its purpose,” to quote Spengler.

But if history teaches anything, it is also that great civilisations do not survive by retreating from progress, but by mastering it. There is no honour in self-imposed decline, no safety in restraint. The duty of any civilisation that seeks to endure is to push technological development to its furthest limits, to expand relentlessly, and to defend itself at all costs. A society that ceases to innovate signs its own death warrant; one that refuses to defend itself invites conquest. The West, born of the Faustian spirit, has no choice but to embrace its destiny—either to advance or to be overtaken, either to dominate or to be dominated. In the great cycles of history, stagnation is not a pause but a prelude to defeat.

Statement

Progress is neither linear nor inevitable—it follows the rise and fall of civilisations, shaped by cultural will and historical necessity, as comparative history would suggest. The West, having long pursued relentless technological and material expansion, now seems to be losing momentum—today in Europe, tomorrow in the US. But without self-confidence and belief in its higher mission, innovation becomes directionless, and progress risks turning into stagnation, then self-destruction. Other civilisations may adopt Western technology for a time and further increase pressure, but only as a tool, not as a destiny.

Weekly