Discuss how "development" and "underdevelopment" are two terms that are intertwined.

In order to decide whether a country is "underdeveloped", we need some sort of metric for what it means to be properly "developed". We don't have any real absolute standard to compare against; we compare countries with other countries. We don't actually know what the limits of economic growth are, but we can say with some confidence that if one country can grow at a given rate, others probably can as well.

This is actually quite important to keep in mind, as the standard of living for many people even in many "underdeveloped" nations is much higher than it was a century ago, which in turn was higher than a millennium ago. The most abject poverty---the $1.25 per day UN extreme poverty level---is most likely comparable to the standard of living that most human beings had when we lived as hunter-gatherers before the invention of agriculture. Moreover, the standard of living of a typical person in India today is comparable to the level of a typical person in the United States in the 1870s.

During most of the 20th century, rich countries grew faster than poor countries, making it seem like "underdevelopment" was worse by comparison; but in fact most poor countries did grow during this period, and people are better off now in most Third World countries today than they were in 1900.

So, when we talk about "underdevelopment", we really mean that countries such as India or Nicaragua are not growing as much as they could be, or as much as other countries are. They often are in fact growing.

There are some who argue in fact that "development" is the problem---that our standards for what constitutes a developed country are skewed too high and we expect an unreasonable amount of wealth. The biggest piece of evidence for this is fossil fuels---they have given us a huge boon to economic growth, but they are not inexhaustible. We will need to replace them soon, and if we can't, then even the 2% annual growth that First World countries have come to expect may no longer be possible.

Make of that what you will, but personally I'm quite strongly in the opposite camp; I believe that "underdeveloped" countries truly are underdeveloped, that the example set by First World countries is one that the entire world could meet if we all worked together to find a way. This is not to say that it will be easy, or quick; but I believe it can and will happen.