"What problems, challenges and hardships in life and work were faced by people in earlier generations and centuries? And how did we solve those problems through science, technology, and invention?"<p>I respect Patrick Collison, but this curriculum worries me. Our understanding of progress <i>already</i> de-emphasizes the nasty parts (eg slavery) by hyper-focusing on innovation. I think this curriculum, which seemingly leaves out critical analysis of labor practices, etc., will worsen our understanding of technological progress.<p>For example, the improvement of infant mortality is one of the major accomplishments of the last couple centuries. We <i>could</i> focus on the role innovation in the improvement of women's health. But I believe that expressly leaving out the exploitation along the way (eg experimentation on enslaved women[1]), leads to understanding history worse, not better.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/17/603163394/-father-of-gynecology-who-experimented-on-slaves-no-longer-on-pedestal-in-nyc" rel="nofollow">https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/17/603163394...</a>
It’s weird how there are so many publications, programs, think tanks, etc devoted to pushing the idea that neo-liberalism is “progress”. And whenever you trace the funding upstream you inevitably find a billionaire with an agenda.