Reform and Modernisation

Two terms regularly used to justify change and to claim a free pass not requiring evidence or justification of worth. Used by persons of widely differing stances from ultra conservative to extreme radical in their attitude to the status quo. In first encounter from any given source they are consequently all but worthless beyond denoting a desire for change and the suspicion of motives. Steve Pincus in [1688: The First Modern Revolution - Steven C. A. Pincus - Google Books](https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Oc-uXxPXfmwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=pincus+1688&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=pincus%201688&f=false) makes extensive use of modernisation in describing apparently approvingly, many of the facets for that time. Throughout there is the sense that modernity is good solely on some unstated axiomatic justification, but embedded in the notion that is consists of change which is approved of by contemporary or current elite opinion. Reform seems to have lost much of its suggestion of improvement and seems now no more informative then "change". The notion of betterment in human affairs is thoroughly dependent on a package of perceptions and attitudes each of such a contestable nature that "reform" begins in contention and ends in confusion. This degradation of the word seems well established by the apparent absence from the language of a single word expressing the opposite. Reform in short is change desired by the reformer and modernisation is the same but with heavier emphasis on the inevitable time dimension. "Evidence based reform" has the merit of guiding us to some description of the motivations behind the proposed action. A term bandied about willy nilly. What does it mean? Apart from the purely factual - pertaining to chronologically recent times, events, practices etc. It seem frequently to convey no more than a set of arrangements or changes of which the writer approves. Politicians are forever wanting to modernise by which they seem to mean no more than to make changes they prefer.

Atheism

This would seem to be the default condition of man, An evolving. ever more complex relationship with the environment and increasing powers of speculation as tot he nature of otherwise opaque experiences. Hence God. The prototypical version of a phrase common in my childhood. "A big boy did it and ran away" A force beyond my capabilities and understanding broadly human in basic features. And if one why not many? And if they are aware of each other and disagree? Hence Olympus, Zeus and all that. But there is only one hence western civilisation and its discontents. Perennially neurotically obsessed by the fragility of its own invention. Hence items such as this: ["God in Exile: Modern Atheism](https://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/SearchResults?tn=God+Exile:+Modern+Atheism)" Over a thousand pages of anguish seemingly written from a firm believers perspective. Available to read [here](https://archive.org/details/godinexilemodern0000fabr/page/n9/mode/2up)If you have the interest. Or Stamina. And pointless.