PR + PR2 + PR3 + ... + PRT;
this total gain is given by the formula,
Total gain in T generations = (R ÷ R-1) (PRT-P).
If we take R to be 2 (which is a very small ratio, requiring the progress of each generation to be merely double that of the preceding one) and if we take T to be (say) 10, then we see that the progress made by the single 10th generation is P × 210, which is 1024 times the progress made in the “first” generation; and we readily compute that the total gain in 10 generations is 2046 times the progress made in the “first” generation. Moreover, to gain a just sense of the impressiveness of this law, the reader must reflect upon the fact that it operates, not merely on one field, but in all fields of human interest. “Operates in all fields” I have just now said; as a matter of fact, as before pointed out, it does not so operate now in all fields nor has it ever done so. My point is that it will so operate when we once acquire sense enough to let it do so. That sense we shall have when and only when we discover that by nature we are time-binders and that the effectiveness of our time-binding capacity is not [pg 092] only a function of time but is, as I have explained, a logarithmic or exponential function of time—a function in which time (T) enters as an exponent, as in the expression PRT, so that we humans are, unlike animals, naturally qualified not only to progress, but to progress more and more rapidly, with an always accelerating acceleration, as the generations pass.
This great fact is to be at once the basis, the regulator and guide in the science and art of Human Engineering. Whatever squares with that law of time-binding human energy, is right and makes for human weal; whatever contravenes it, is wrong and makes for human woe.
And so I repeat that the world will have uninterrupted, peaceful progress when and only when the so-called social “sciences”—the life-regulating “sciences” of ethics, law, philosophy, economics, religion, politics, and government—are technologized; when and only when they are made genuinely scientific in spirit and method; for then and only then will they advance, like the natural, mathematical and technological sciences, in conformity to the fundamental exponential law of the time-binding nature of man; then and then only, by the equal pace of progress in all cardinal matters, the equilibrium of social institutions will remain stable and social cataclysms cease.
Chapter V. Wealth
I beg the reader to allow me to begin this chapter with a word of warning. The reader is aware that Criticism—by which I mean Thought—may be any one of three kinds: it may be purely destructive; it may be purely constructive; or it may be both destructive and constructive at the same time. Purely destructive criticism is sometimes highly useful. If an old idea or a system of old ideas be false and therefore harmful, it is a genuine service to attack it and destroy it even if nothing be offered to take its place, just as it is good to destroy a rattlesnake lurking by a human pathway, even if one does not offer a substitute for the snake. But, however useful destructive criticism may be, it is not an easy service to render; for old ideas, however false and harmful, are protected alike by habit and by the inborn conservatism of many minds. Now, habit indeed is exceedingly useful—even indispensable to the effective conduct of life—for it enables us to do many useful things automatically and therefore easily, without conscious thinking, and thus to save our mental energy for other work; but for the same [pg 094] reason, habit is often very harmful; it makes us protect false ideas automatically, and so when the destructive critic endeavors to destroy such ideas by reasoning with us, he finds that he is trying to reason with automats—with machines. Such is the chief difficulty encountered by destructive criticism. On the other hand, purely constructive criticism—purely constructive thought—consists in introducing new ideas of a kind that do not clash, or do not seem to clash, with old ones. Is such criticism or thought easy? Far from it. It has difficulties of its own. These are of two varieties: the difficulty of showing people who are content with their present stock of old ideas that the new ones are interesting or important; and the great difficulty of making new ideas clear and intelligible, for the art of being clear and perfectly intelligible is very, very hard to acquire and to practise. The third kind of criticism—the third kind of thought—the kind that is at once both destructive and constructive—has a double aim—that of destroying old ideas that are false and that of replacing them with new ideas that are true; and so the third kind of criticism or thought is the most difficult of all, for it has to overcome both the difficulty of destructive criticism and that of constructive thought.