Are Humans Becoming Better?
Published:
Are humans becoming better?
The answer depends on what “better” means.
Less violent?
More compassionate?
More equal?
More knowledgeable?
More free?
More environmentally responsible?
The historical record is mixed.
Many societies have abolished slavery legally.
Expanded women’s rights.
Reduced child mortality.
Increased literacy.
Created broader legal equality.
Developed stronger protections against torture and arbitrary power.
These are genuine moral and institutional advances.
They should not be minimized simply because injustice remains.
But the twentieth century also produced industrial genocide.
World wars.
Nuclear weapons.
Totalitarian states.
Mass displacement.
Modern technology increased the scale at which humans could harm one another.
Progress in capability exceeded progress in restraint.
This creates an uncomfortable pattern.
Humanity may become morally better in some norms while becoming technically more dangerous.
Violence also changes form.
A society can reduce murder while tolerating exploitation.
End legal slavery while maintaining severe economic dependence.
Recognize equality formally while reproducing structural inequality.
Moral progress is therefore not one curve.
It has dimensions.
There is also the problem of historical visibility.
Past violence is often undercounted.
Modern violence is documented instantly.
This can make the present look uniquely terrible.
The reverse bias also exists.
Modern societies may celebrate progress while ignoring harms pushed out of sight through global supply chains or environmental damage.
Comparison requires careful evidence.
Moral norms do seem capable of expanding.
Public torture, once normal in many societies, became unacceptable in much of the world.
Slavery, once widespread, became globally stigmatized legally.
Racial hierarchy lost much of its explicit legitimacy.
Women’s political exclusion became harder to defend openly.
These shifts matter because legitimacy shapes behavior.
An injustice that must hide is politically weaker than one celebrated as virtue.
But norms can reverse.
Rights are not evolutionarily guaranteed.
Institutions can decay.
Propaganda can reactivate tribalism.
Fear can narrow moral concern.
People can accept restrictions they previously rejected.
History does not move automatically toward justice.
This is perhaps the most important correction to progress narratives.
Improvement is maintained.
Not inherited permanently.
Human psychology may not have changed dramatically.
The same capacities remain.
Empathy.
Cruelty.
Cooperation.
Tribalism.
Self-sacrifice.
Domination.
What changes are institutions and norms.
A society can make cruelty costly.
Or reward it.
Make prejudice embarrassing.
Or prestigious.
Human behavior is highly responsive to context.
This gives reason for both hope and caution.
If people were fixed as morally terrible, reform would be impossible.
If people were naturally good, institutions would be unnecessary.
Reality is more demanding.
We are flexible.
The environment matters.
Technology adds another layer.
Digital platforms can amplify outrage.
They can also expose injustice.
AI can increase surveillance.
It can also expand access to knowledge.
Biotechnology can heal.
It can also create new risks.
Moral progress now depends partly on technical governance.
Are humans becoming better?
Perhaps our moral vocabulary is improving faster than our instincts.
We increasingly possess concepts capable of condemning cruelty universally.
Human rights.
Dignity.
Equality.
Consent.
Animal welfare.
Environmental responsibility.
The question is whether institutions can make those concepts durable.
Humanity does not become better because time passes.
It becomes better when people build systems that make better behavior easier, worse behavior harder, and hypocrisy more visible.
Progress is possible.
It is not automatic.