Naming a discipline that did not exist
Progress Studies is a nascent intellectual movement, named in a 2019 essay by economist Tyler Cowen and entrepreneur Patrick Collison, calling for a new discipline devoted to understanding how and why civilizations achieve durable progress — and how to get more of it.
Reacting against a perceived slowdown in scientific and material advance, it studies the history of science, invention, and institutions, and champions reforms to funding, regulation, and metascience. Spreading through blogs, essays, fellowships, and new funders, it overlaps with the rationalist and tech-optimist worlds and the “abundance” agenda in policy. A young, still-forming scene, it represents the contemporary Promethean impulse organized into a research and advocacy program.
- Patrick Collison
- Tyler Cowen
- Jason Crawford
- Archetype · Prometheus
What it keeps returning to
- M.01Studying progress as a discipline
- M.02Stagnation and the “great stagnation”
- M.03Metascience and better funding
- M.04Techno-optimism as agenda
- M.05Abundance and building
Why it spread
Naming a “missing discipline” and a hidden stagnation gave restless technologists a cause and an identity.
Its optimism — that we can and should accelerate — countered a pessimistic cultural mood.
Proximity to serious money and talent (Collison, Cowen) lent it clout.
Progress is understudied and has slowed; we should study its causes and deliberately accelerate it.
In full: progress — scientific, technological, economic — is understudied and has slowed; we should study its causes and deliberately accelerate it through better institutions, science, and building.
What binds it, what pulls it apart
→← Convergent
- A founding manifesto and the blog/essay ecosystem
- Metascience funding and fellowships
- A network of aligned founders and economists
←→ Divergent
- Vagueness about what “progress” means, and for whom
- Overlap and tension with EA, rationalism, and the “abundance” agenda
- Critics charging naive techno-optimism
The forms it works in
A scene with no studio, no lab bench, and no gallery — its instruments are publication and money.
- the essay
- the blog
- the fellowship
- the metascience grant
How it holds together
A loose, online, elite intellectual network organized by essays, funding, and a few prominent figures; more a sensibility and agenda than an institution.
Morphology: network, not institution
Fig. 2 · schematic
What it moved
Shifted elite discourse toward building, metascience reform, and an “abundance agenda”; spawned new science-funding experiments and policy conversations.
A network that declared the study of progress a missing discipline and turned techno-optimism into a research-and-funding agenda.
Keyed to the literature
- Patrick Collison & Tyler Cowen, “We Need a New Science of Progress,” The Atlantic (2019)used for · the founding call
- Tyler Cowen, The Great Stagnation (2011)
Keyed to the standard published literature on this scene (representative, not exhaustive; not independently re-verified against each edition).
Young and diffusing into metascience, the abundance movement, and tech policy; still defining what it is.