06-25-2002, 08:06 AM
Hi<br>
I think the reason I don't agree with the assessment of Chinese culture is that I make a distinction between science and technology. Technology requires systematic trials and assesments of success. Terra cotta, maybe the first sophisitcated non-mechanical invention, is not banal as the correct mix of inert and active components is very tricky to find. Somebody must have noticed a freak effect and then focused on it and made all kinds of trials and errors to define the best procedure. Similarly the invention of paper, gunpowder, and the compass require a systematic approach to perfect them into usable instruments. Again think about the compass: someone made another fantastically freak observation that hot and rapidly cooling thin needles (a needle factory smith) floating on the cooling water, due to surface tension, align in a common direction. I find it truely remarkable. But in my mind that still does not make science.<br>
<br>
Regards Greek views of theory versus pratice I disagree because you forget that Archimedes and many others were very practical oriented. There has always been a debate in the Greek world and thruout our philosophical history as to what is most important, theory or experiment, and there always will be as it is a difficult and subtle philosophical question.<br>
<br>
Regards the Arabs I think there is a certain degree of revisionism at work here. I personally never believed the Arabs contributed much. Who did the work were those that the Arabs conquered. The Arabs conquered the Byzantine east with its Alexandria. That the Arabs protected and cultivated and allowed their subjects to work while the West was in a confused state is true. But there is a fundamental cultural difference, at work then as it is at work still today: for the Islamic world the Koran is the measure of all things. In the Hellenisitic-Roman, even in the middle ages and finally in the Renaissance world, Man is the measure of all things. Culture does make a great difference. I believe that Science cannot work if there is another level of "truth" that sets priorities. This separation of religion from the study of nature or from politics is what is the unique contribution of the West. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ugoffredo.showPublicProfile?language=EN>goffredo</A> at: 6/25/02 11:17:50 am<br></i>
I think the reason I don't agree with the assessment of Chinese culture is that I make a distinction between science and technology. Technology requires systematic trials and assesments of success. Terra cotta, maybe the first sophisitcated non-mechanical invention, is not banal as the correct mix of inert and active components is very tricky to find. Somebody must have noticed a freak effect and then focused on it and made all kinds of trials and errors to define the best procedure. Similarly the invention of paper, gunpowder, and the compass require a systematic approach to perfect them into usable instruments. Again think about the compass: someone made another fantastically freak observation that hot and rapidly cooling thin needles (a needle factory smith) floating on the cooling water, due to surface tension, align in a common direction. I find it truely remarkable. But in my mind that still does not make science.<br>
<br>
Regards Greek views of theory versus pratice I disagree because you forget that Archimedes and many others were very practical oriented. There has always been a debate in the Greek world and thruout our philosophical history as to what is most important, theory or experiment, and there always will be as it is a difficult and subtle philosophical question.<br>
<br>
Regards the Arabs I think there is a certain degree of revisionism at work here. I personally never believed the Arabs contributed much. Who did the work were those that the Arabs conquered. The Arabs conquered the Byzantine east with its Alexandria. That the Arabs protected and cultivated and allowed their subjects to work while the West was in a confused state is true. But there is a fundamental cultural difference, at work then as it is at work still today: for the Islamic world the Koran is the measure of all things. In the Hellenisitic-Roman, even in the middle ages and finally in the Renaissance world, Man is the measure of all things. Culture does make a great difference. I believe that Science cannot work if there is another level of "truth" that sets priorities. This separation of religion from the study of nature or from politics is what is the unique contribution of the West. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ugoffredo.showPublicProfile?language=EN>goffredo</A> at: 6/25/02 11:17:50 am<br></i>
Jeffery Wyss
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
