Has something been missed? Not a long time ago I read that the invention which has helped mans progress the most by far in the last century was the humble bicycle..It enabled millions to visit nearby villages and prevented the interbreeding which would have otherwise occurred.

ed bradbury, bournemouth, dorset

my view on the collapse of atheism..My daughter ,a catholic is married to a Moslem and has 4 children .I as a non-believer am interested to see what will be the outcome of their eventual religious beliefs. ,(if any). Children are not stupid and will come to realise that its an accident of birth which can determine ones religion. (if not I'll tell them) All over the world with cheaper travel young people are roaming,meeting and falling in love with faces they find more interesting than in their homeland and inter-faith marriages will increase enormously
Its just as likely that religion as we know it will collapse.

ed bradbury, bournemouth, dorset

As a GP, I have seen enormous changes in the last twenty years which have greatly enhanced my opportunities to help my patients improve their lives. The information revolution has vastly expanded wealth in many countries that used to be very poor, notably in Eastern Europe and Asia. But the greatest change the world has seen has been - as Mr Parris implies - the collapse of atheism, especially in Eastern Europe and Asia. Secular "humanism", in all its forms, has been seen to fail and has been decisively rejected. And, as Western European populations decline and are recolonised from the East, the same will shortly happen here.

Desmond Persaud, Wimbledon, London, UK

The Egyptians invented most things. We've been going backwards ever since.

jj, Cambs, UK

Genetics - first mapped and utilised post 1990. Huge importance to the world, just the average person is not aware of the potential changes to our lives it can make.

Jashen, London, UK

It appears to me that Mr Parris is living on a different planet than most of us. Did he think in the 1950's that today he would find his pocket ringing from a communicator? The changes that have occurred in my lifetime post 1950 are considerable. Science has indeed moved forward. Unfortunately the greatest achievements are stuck in black ops military programs. Ever notice that the US military never uses any of it's advanced equipment until it considers it mostly obsolete. There is a good reason for that as it doesn't want any of it falling into the wrong hands thus giving away anything that the others didn't understand. The use of stealth fighters and bombers in the gulf war is but one example. Google search Steven Greer or Tom Bearden on the web and you will find that so much has advanced only to be hidden within the military. Unless this tech is released soon we are entering the point of no return as a planet. The technology is there. Demand disclosure now before it is too late.

Kevin, Grand Rapids, Michigan USA

About a month ago I watched a 1930's Marx Bros.comedy film A week ago sitting with my grandchildren I had to endure a Mr.Bean "comedy " No progress there then

ed bradbury, bournemouth, dorset

"IT has yet to represent much more than a huge convenience. Perhaps it will but so far its effect is to facilitate and accelerate. "
Piggy Kruger's 60 year model might be appropriate, as IT moves from a huge convenience for those who want to use it, to an absolute necessity for daily life. Think NIR, NHS spine, national road charging, chips in bins etc. The change will be at least as profound in its social effects as any of the C20 developments you list. The State will be able (be in no doubt about its willingness) to monitor individual behaviour in incredible detail and offer rewards and disincentives accordingly. Your personal choices will be known to authority not just in the moment but in a permanent record from birth to death. If you don't foresee the power of governments to control society through IT, ponder why the ID card you will have to pay for carries the statement "this card remains the property of the Secretary of State and can be withdrawn at any time".

Paul, Stafford,

In the past, we invested in the future and the progress helped everyone.

But for the past 40 years, we've tried to bribe everyone to be our friends.

It didn't work.

The question is will we return to investing in the future, or will we keep trying to bribe the barbarians (both domestic and foreign) until we're totally bankrupt, the system clapses and they find out they can't even feed half the populations they have without our help which we won't be able to give any more because they finally broke our back?

Ugly American, Las Vegas, USA

We may be on the verge of world shaping change, looking at patterns. From the Wall Street Crash of 1929 to the Great Stockmarket Crash of 1989, heralding another worldwide economic downturn, sixty years passed. From Pearl Harbour in 1941 to the Twin Towers in 2001, sixty years passed. From the Soviet Union"s creating the A-Bomb in 1947 or 1948, to a possible similar achievement by Iran in the near future, sixty years have passed. Does Mathew Parris really believe his own words?. I have no doubt there are great developments and secret technologies being perfected at this very moment, possibly the stuff of sci-fi dreams, kept ultra-secret for any military possibilities they may lend the possesser. The Times last week mentioned an explosion at CERN"s LHG, delaying research by several months. Was it an accident?. Is the USA"s Fermilab sharing information with CERN, or are they competing?. I would predict that within a decade, these paricle physics labs make NOW seem like a Dark Age.

Piggy Kruger, bridgwater, UK

No, it will not pass; and much of the world's cruelty and bloodshed in the last century stemed from the puerile belief that human nature was perfectable. Recognizing and accepting our limitations can in the future far better prepare us for intelligently dealing with mankind's natural shortcomings. What we cannot change, we must honestly manage; and we cannot manage what we neither recognize nor accept. Should our behaviorial aspirations ever prefer man's genetic engineering over nature's, we shall be on the path to extinction by our own hubris.

Michael Grable, Silver Spring, MD/USA

hmmm I wonder if a black person in America would say 'nothing of importance or new has happened after WWII' But that aside, do you really believe technology makes a difference in society and belief? There was so much discovered by the Greeks and Chinese in the BC era that was was abandoned and forgotten and it will happen again. We are faced with a social problem (how to get along) that has advanced very little compared with technology. And the saying :'you cannot stop progress' Total bull. History shows progress, both socially and technology wise, is stopped and reversed all the time. History shows every time new ideas and ways of life arise, a backlash of the old ways rears it's head and eats the change. It's the terrible weight of history.

Charlie Beer, San Rafael, CA

Good People,
Those who are superior to you in background, breeding, and/or station do not
_wish_ to see any changes. In fact, we would prefer that you not even discuss such things, and are prepared to take any necessary measures to ensure that you desist from doing so.
Is that clear?

Winthrop Dunghill , Nantucket, MA, USA

Few contributors here have mentioned the environmental aspects of post-WW2 change; that is, the growing impact of human activities on the biosphere, the growing awareness of those impacts, the emergence of new technologies to cope with those impacts, and the growing realisation that our civilisation will have to be radically reconfigured in order to remain ecologically viable. Look at the hugely influential pre-WW2 innovations Martin listed - "automobiles, aeroplanes, the jet engine, electricity, telephones, radio, television, refrigerators, washing machines, industrial mass production" - and it is clear that many of them have been greatly altered in recent decades. The pattern is one of moving towards technologies that require less input from nature (oil, steel, coal, etc) and which create less output into the natural world (pollution - CO2, CFCs, etc). We may look back on the current period as the one in which industrial civilisation learned it had to live within its means.

Sean Maher, Melbourne, Australia, VIC

Humanism's belief in the essential goodness of man wasn't the answer to society's ills when the Enlightenment philosophers proposed it, and time has only proven the point. Like communism, liberal humanism only looks good on paper--it doesn't work when you add actual humans, even the best of whom are selfish and fearful. And let's face it, it isn't always the "best" of us who rise to power.
It's counterproductive to continue pretending that man is capable of evolving into a perfect being who will create a perfect society. History--which looks no different than today's headlines--shows us the dangerous fallacy of that dream.
Humans can rise to great heights, yes. We can create beauty, make sacrifices, show compassion. But we aren't capable of making a heaven of Earth, because our spiritual toolbox is half-empty. The best we can do is be honest about what humanity is, and remember the lesson of the tower of Babel.

Deborah Shepherd, Midland, U.S./Virginia

That was a very long and ill-informed rant.

If you think that nothing has moved on, insist on having only pre-1950s treatment next time you are in hospital.

Tom Oaklely, Cambridge,

"Much food comes from chemicals or sawdust, or in frozen standard bricks." Kampffert was right about that one. Have you visited a takeaway recently? Well, don't.

Janet, London,

may I add a p.s to my letter " and will be for a very long time to come"

ed bradbury, bournemouth, dorset

I have only to look at religious belief throughout the world today (and see contributors comments in the "miracle" debate) to conclude that whatever advances were made in either half of the last century ,we are still in the dark ages.

ed bradbury, bournemouth, dorset

This is a wonderful article, but I think it too quickly generalises from major scientific ideas to all those that hold sway over our lives. What would surely seem revolutionarily different (to them for better or worse) to someone transported from 50 years ago in one bound, would be the utter, utter transformation of social norms (over race, class, gender, patriotism, deference, authority). To give just one example: in just fifty years there has been a shift, perhaps never before experienced in its breadth and depth, in the life expectations women have, the relationship between men and women (and men and men, and women and women), the way we interact, and the broader notions of how we should behave. To live as a man or a women now, and to live then, is to live very differently indeed. So too with race. That these changes had no invention dates, no eureka moments, or can trace roots of ideas far back, doesn't make them any less profound. And to many of us this does feel like progress.

M. Coakley, Brooklyn, USA

I will agree with your article. We have entered a period of no exit.

NP, Birmingham,

If you meet a man who has walked on the surface of another planet you can guarantee one thing about him. He will be old. No young man has done so.
Notice that every quarter the government reports economic growth of such and such a percent, but the two kids, car, mortgage and family holiday lifestyle of your parents is now out of reach? What they've done is to count women's involvement in the formal labour market as "growth". Then when inevitably the education system collapsed and everyone had to go to university to catch up what they didn't learn at school, that was counted as "growth" too. Then the casualisation of unskilled workers was counted as "efficiency savings", never mind that Bloggs the feather-bedded cleaner was at least providing for his family and keeping his boys out of trouble. Some growth.
An excellent artice.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

I disagree with the comments that the world has not changed in the past 50 years. In fact it has changed even in the way it changes. Instead of the mentioned breakthroughs, like the discovery of electricity, the last 50 years has provided more in breadth than it maybe has in depth. Not only do we have more fields of expertise but these fields are more advanced than ever. We now even have more integration between these departments and in a sense we are shaping the world more fervently. Maybe with this progression there is less distinction; each advance seems just an expansion of the last. We are making remarkable developments but maybe we are losing the awareness and importance of these advances. Our job for the next 50 years is to streamline these advances into a process we can all appreciate and benefit from instead of merely query.

William Roden, Birmingham, UK

Matthew Parris is wrong.

Lest anyone disagree with me I offer two related examples: The transistor (invented in 1947) and the integrated circuit.

These are clearly two of the greatest and most influential advances ever made by man.

HJ, Reading, UK

Scientific progress has not stopped, but our belief that it will solve our problems has. Perhaps in the next 50 years we will rediscover the importance of our Christian heritage. As a scientist, I have learned that science will never solve all our problems. We need to keep searching for ultimate meaning and purpose elsewhere.

Alan, Redhill, Surrey

Human nature never changes but technology amplifies its effects. The terrorists petard turns into a nuclear weapon. The doctors leaches into penicillin, X-rays to MRIs. With CCTV, mobile phones, emails, databases and search engines the state can spy on us to either protect or enslave. Does the chance of a significantly better life outway the price we may have to pay for it. Perhaps it's time for technology to stop.

Tom Roberts, Derby, UK

"Others thought a liberal humanism — and, of course, science — would do it.". Others have remarked on science's continuing contribution. But Matthew is right about a change of Zeitgeist - there is far less optimism, far more resignation, far less participation in politics and far more distrust of the whole system. Is this an over-correction to our previously naive credulousness? Whatever, it is liable to cripple our attempts to tackle our problems, for which liberal humanism still offers the best approach. We have to believe in human agency, the human capacity to find ways of living on the planet in (comparative) peace and in balance with what it will sustain. A liberal humanist open society offers the best chance to engage all the available talents. It will not be easy - but with today's pervasive cynical despair it will surely be impossible. Cynicism is a self-fulfilling prophesy. Today's clever "treasonable clerks" must be asked if being right is so precious to them.

David J F Pollock, London,

Total nonsense of course.; and naturally written by a law graduate not a scientist. To say that there has been little or no scientific advancement over the past 50 years shows breathtaking ignorance. There has probably been more science (and technology) "done" in the last 50 years than in the rest of human history. Just because aeroplanes still have 2 wings a couple of jet engines doesn't mean they are the same as they were in the 1950's. They are now made of carbon-fibre composites, have aerodynamics based on computational fluid dynamics and have engines which operate at temperatures 1000 centigrade above the metal's melting point. I suggest Matthew stays in more rather than wasting his time going to dinner parties and chattering to similarly ignorat arts graduates.

towcestarian, northants, UK

Unravelling of DNA. Cloning; and therefore the ability to create life. Women's control of fertility - an absolute revolution in itself. Only a few of obvious advances since the last war, with huge implications for the future. What universe is Matthew Parris living in?

kate, oxford,

On the nail as usual. My concern is that we could actually be going backwards. Taking religious superstition seriously (as long as it's not Christianity) now seems to be required whereas "science"` is something to be seen with suspicion. Carl Sagan wrote an excellent book just before he died; The Demon Haunted World - science as a candle in the dark. So far it seems to be playing out. The candle is guttering.

Ray Warren, Plymouth,

Maybe life seems to have gound to a halt in matthews world. I suggest he gets himself a technical understanding and then reads "The World is Flat" by Paul Friedman for an understanding on how technology continues to change the World at what seems to me to be an exponential rate. For example, Matthew goes on about how travel has not really changed completely forgetting that technology is being deployed in an attempt to prevent that need. The next big thing happening now is Virtual Presence. This will solve multiple problems especially reducing the need for Business Travel and all the time, cost and CO2 that entails.The early systems now being deployed are impressive - lets see what they look like in 10 years.

Neill, maidstone, uk

what rubbish. hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty in the last 50 years, medical advances have saved millions of lives, IT has revolutionised the way we work, shop, enjoy leisure, foreign travel has mushroomed, social freedoms unimaginable 50 years ago are commonplace in much of the world, and the global stock of ideas - scientific, philosophical, artistic - is more profoundly rich than at any time in human history.

jim poyser, manchester, uk

I might mention contraception, and epidural anaesthesia (rather useful in childbirth). And ultra-sound scans. And much more of immediate relevance to many people, not all of them women.

Well, I suppose you can't think of everything...

NL, Brussels, Belgium

There was an extensive article about this in the New Scientist a few months ago. It postulated that one reason for the hiatus in new discoveries is that we've picked all the 'low hanging fruit' that's easy to discover! Steel hulled ships, radio, petrol & diesel infernal combustion engines, flight, etc.
The rate of new discoveries may slow down naturally.
Still, bio and nano technologies, artificial intelligence, and as yet unknown advances in physics may give future historians of C21 something to look back on in the same way mechanical engineering has of C19 and C20?

paul newbold, sheffield, england

The World Wars may have hastened developments but most of the discoveries were in times of relative peace - very little was discovered in war but the concentrated exploitation of knowledge that warfare brings made change faster. Mass transportation, power generation and communication are based on 19th or early 20th century discoveries. The basis of IT is the transistor, another invention of the first half of the 20th century.
I'm not sure though about Matthew's pessimism - it may be that after the consumer revolution, which is what the mass exploitation of technology has wrought, the next steps forward are around humanity adjusting to this new world. The 19th and 20th centuries looked for answers in novel technologies, perhaps the 21st will look less for novelty and more for stability and social change.

Ted Coffin, East Knoyle, UK

Mathew has actually pointed out why there has been no movement forward. If you analyse the major changes, they all are based around two World Wars, which due to the upheaval they imposed on the world poulation pushed forward the social and technical changes that we have witnessed up to 1950.

So does Mathew want another major conflict to engulf the world and so move us up to the next technological and social breakthrough?

B Wight, Glasgow, UK

Given that the basic nature of the human beast appears not to have changed much in 40,000 years, I wouldn't be looking for a breakthrough anytime soon.

Ken Leyland, Liverpool, U.K.

It is amazing! Our space program is going back 35 years to Apollo-style craft. A step backward because they knew how to build things back then that simply worked..
Technology seems to be in a stage of continual 'tinkering' and slowly improving what has already been built.
I didn't realize this before,. but now I see you're correct.
New thinkng is facing obstacles of liability, fear and 'old-think'.
I am a Biomedical Equipment Technician. It seems that anything new is usually a remake of a previous product..nothing really new. ( More expensive, though.)
Thank you for the wake up call.

George Chiasson, Milledgeville, Georgia, USA

Hopefully in 2050 I will look back and say..the first 30 years of my life were great..the next 10 .not much happened.The next 10 years and more were exciting.. then things changed.Having suffered a while to put the thing right the public got conned into thinking the grass was greener elsewhere.The next 10 years were difficult to say the least..from progress we went to..backwards?yet stilll the guy in the street kept the incubents in power.During the next 10 years I received a pension..about 20% of the national average wage and was told this would become less over time.My local council was soon to be bankrupt.About this time someone mentioned ideals,idealism and ideology..betterment of humanity.My children..and grand children have NOTHING to look forward to.The pensions will be totally inadequate.No doctors,no Dentists.nothing..The world has gone backwards since ??1969?In 2050 I will be 110+hope my sex life is better then

david, Barnsley, S.Yorks

I don't know, Mr. Parris - a well-tailored suit and tie can look quite spiffing.

Kevin, London,

Gosh no. Just think of Social "Science", post-modernist textual analysis, performance and conceptual art.

All the really crucial stuff is post-WWII.

jon livesey, Sunnyvale, CA/US