/lit/ - Literature

>>19203674
Not him but the problem with "decadence" is that it's unscientific. It's easy to call a society decadent by anecdotal examples, but how do you really determine it? Quantify it? Compare societies? What criteria to use? I can assure you the west has seemed decadent to any primitive society they ever contacted. That is what Tainter means by "that which differs from one's own moral code.."

Instead he posits a clearly definable and measurable theory of the collapse of societies - it being their complexity. More complex societies essentially have more parts to them and require more energy to sustain. Think massive bureaucracies and religious monuments. Once energy sources run out, they collapse. The collapse will be predictable based on several criteria.

It's all very clear and scientific whereas with "decadence" you'll remain forever arguing over moral values.

And I say this as someone who actually got really interested in Spengler after hearing of his positions from Tainter.

I'll leave with this graph. One of the neatest things I've seen. Basically it is civilization quantified and fits well with his theory.