Thanks for downloading the In Our Time Podcast. For more details about In Our Time and for our terms of use, please go to bbc.co.uk forward slash radio for. I hope you enjoy the program.

Hello, at the end of the century, approaches of the Gallup now, we can hear the trumpets tuning up.

But as man has grown in years and knowledge, has he also progressed in terms of happiness and a true understanding of the human condition.

The verse who argued that it was enlightenment, which gave birth to the idea of the possibility of progress.

The biblical account of time, which had held until the 18th century, was replaced by a conceit with put man, not God, at the centre of the story of progress.

But do you still believe in that story? Have we reached at the, have we reached what's been called the end of history and the culmination of man's evolution?

Was the Argentinian writer George Louis Borkes, right when he said, we've stopped believing in progress, what progress that is.

With me to discuss this is Aunt New Year, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Bradford, an author of, After Progress, Finding the Old Way Forward.

And the psychoanalyst and writer Adam Phillips, who's author of Darwin's Worms, which has also been published recently.

Aunt New Year, can we define terms a little here. Progress is such a huge concept.

Do you want to differentiate between material progress and moral progress?

Yes, I mean, obviously over the past few centuries, there's been immense progress in science, in technology, in medical developments, material comfort generally, and also in peaceable and democratic arrangements.

And I think in a way, the Enlightenment, the European Enlightenment has developed an extended this idea of progress, so that it moves into other areas where I think it's more questionable.

According to the Enlightenment, negatively, what we have to do is to get rid of superstition, repression, religion, old traditions and allegiances.

Positively, if we have rational, modern, political, social arrangements starting from scratch, we can then produce a society, which is, to some extent, ideal.

And more fundamentally, if we see human beings demythologized in scientific terms, people will be able to pursue happiness untrammeled and unrestrained.

Do you see material and moral progress as being bound together? Can you see that people's material progress will make them kinder to each other, less likely to be insane with vengeance and cruelty?

It may do, but I think that the sort of image of mankind, which comes out of this Enlightenment notion of progress, basing it on scientific thought, leads to an image of human beings, which is not flattering to ourselves, which actually undermines our ideals.

And if you think of Goya's famous picture about the sleep of reason bringing forth monsters, I would say, if you're thinking of Enlightenment reason, it's reason, which brings forth monsters.

In the sense that it shows us not to be creatures with high aspirations and able to reach them, but simply scientifically determined beings, determined by forces of society,

and by Darwinian explanations, just having to survive and reproduce and so on.

We've brought forth monsters where before the Age of Reason, I've just been reading Ted Hughes' Translations of Arsostis and the Oristai, and there are monsters there, right?

...