Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Science : East Vs West
Here is something that I have wondered about for a while...
Over the last few thousand years Western and middle Eastern cultures have made great advances in understanding the Sciences. Many of the observations made regarding the size of the Earth, the movement of Stars and Planets, Newtons findings on how to measure gravity etc have held up very well even until today. At the same time many of the ideas about the Mind and the true nature of the Universe were way off the mark.
At the same time Tibetain and other Eastern Cultures were making great strides in the understanding of the nature of the mind but could not figure out how to measure the distance between the Earth and the moon and other very basic exturnal observations.
Over time, it would seem that some of this would have evened out a bit but until the late 20th cenurty this Dichotomy has remained and in many ways is still in place today.
Why was there such a difference in the sucsess and failures of the East and the west?
Over the last few thousand years Western and middle Eastern cultures have made great advances in understanding the Sciences. Many of the observations made regarding the size of the Earth, the movement of Stars and Planets, Newtons findings on how to measure gravity etc have held up very well even until today. At the same time many of the ideas about the Mind and the true nature of the Universe were way off the mark.
At the same time Tibetain and other Eastern Cultures were making great strides in the understanding of the nature of the mind but could not figure out how to measure the distance between the Earth and the moon and other very basic exturnal observations.
Over time, it would seem that some of this would have evened out a bit but until the late 20th cenurty this Dichotomy has remained and in many ways is still in place today.
Why was there such a difference in the sucsess and failures of the East and the west?
0
Comments
That plus the fact that science and technology was also driven as a way to make money (emerging capitalism).
Just a guess on my part.
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/enlightenment.html
There was a very famous Yogi who was a catcher for the New York Yankees. To paraphrase him: "They're pretty much the same only different".
Geography separated the two for a long time. Then as geography and information flow became less problematic, the two cultures began to mix and we have what we have today.
But the really significant issue is culture. Culture will only use the technology it needs to support that particular culture. If, for instance, the boomerang works well in Aboriginal society one might wonder why the idea never caught on in New Guinea. Perhaps the reason has to do with the terrain but again perhaps boomerangs were a typically man accoutrement which no self-respecting male in New Guinea would be seen death with. Technology is largely culturally driven.
What the West did learn was that it could 'appropriate' all sorts of things from other cultures and deftly turn the cultural significance of the things, whether technology or language or music or whatever, around so that it appear the West had invented them. Which is perhaps the reason why we in the West don't like acknowledging the contributions Islam has made to the Western science and knowledge.
All of which is an excellent demonstration that reality is culturally constructed.
(Just kidding, R.
The interesting thing about some of China's early technology was that it was used for peaceful pursuits. They invented gunpowder, but didn't use it to kill and wreak havoc. They used it for fireworks, to entertain. Only when Westerners got hold of it did it become a means for destruction. Westerners invented the gun and cannon to go with the gunpowder, sort of "value-added" technology. Why were Westerners the more aggressive ones back then? I think this issue of China leading the West, then falling behind in technology was covered in Jared Diamond's book, "Guns, Germs, and Steel". Check it out. (another book for your "to read" list!)
The long imperial Chinese history is laden with one dynasty overthrowing another, mostly due to peasant revolt. Just like any natural cycle, dynasties rise and fall. Such violent periods are mere punctuations in between stable regimes. The Chinese like to fight amongst themselves but never quite ventured out on foreign conquests. Even when the Ming Emperor sent out the greatest Chinese Armada on an epic voyage in 1405, it was not a fleet of conquest and colonalisation.
If you understand the Chinese psyche enough, you will know why Science was still not in vogue in China when the West started its Industrial Revolution.