Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

thenewatlantis.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 413 posts

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#41

Post by throwaway123x2 »

Yetanfou wrote: post #30
throwaway123x2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from a Muslim country and now living in the West: and I can say that this is incorrect. Generally speaking where I am from, the best minds go to medicine, the next best to engineering and law, and the leftovers go to the military / religious study. The failure of those best minds to produce results is an artifact of non-reason based education (in my country there was a huge emphasis on rote learning) and a lack o…

I suspect many people conflate scholarship with clergy because that was the way things worked in the middle ages in Europe: if you wanted to have enough time for scholarly pursuits the clergy was probably the best place to be. Once it became possible to make a career as a scientist this practice changed but the association between clergy and scholarship still lives in the public perception.

This definitely used to be true, but I don't think it survived colonialism. Nowadays as kids are growing up, there are pretty much two paths: secular (in a manner of speaking) Western style schools, or traditional madrassas (not dissimilar to pre-colonial schools in the region). At least in my middle class socio-economic circles, people who undertook exculsively religious study (as opposed to studying it on the side with western education) were looked at with derision.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#42

Post by tasogare »

Yetanfou wrote: post #30
throwaway123x2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from a Muslim country and now living in the West: and I can say that this is incorrect. Generally speaking where I am from, the best minds go to medicine, the next best to engineering and law, and the leftovers go to the military / religious study. The failure of those best minds to produce results is an artifact of non-reason based education (in my country there was a huge emphasis on rote learning) and a lack o…

I suspect many people conflate scholarship with clergy because that was the way things worked in the middle ages in Europe: if you wanted to have enough time for scholarly pursuits the clergy was probably the best place to be. Once it became possible to make a career as a scientist this practice changed but the association between clergy and scholarship still lives in the public perception.

No, I had in mind the talibans in Afghanistan. I don’t make the error of reading the islamic world through the lens of the European christian past.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#43

Post by jariel »

netcan wrote: post #28

The problem with theorizing about such things is that, being untestable, it's very hard to distinguish between our own narrative biases and objectivity. Maybe the golden age was a byproduct of imperialism. Not many naked imperialists out there anymore, but the arguments are easy enough to make. The US, The USSR... both with some stunning scientific achievements (eg nuclear physics, space travel, physics) achievements…

So that's a very good point. The 'rise of Arabic Science' was totally consistent with conquest.

It seems there's a lot of hubris in Science, just like Imperialism, Art, etc. - and you need a lot of 'excess wealth' to delve into things that are not 'subsistence'.

The Renaissance probably would not have happened without the concentration of wealth in Venice and nearby areas. I mean who on Earth is going to pay for those weird/crazy instruments to be made and for creators full time to come up with this insane 'symphonic' concoctions. We take it for granted now but what happened was a miracle, and that's just in music.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#44

Post by Retric »

feralimal wrote: post #34

Ha ha - primitive Islamic religionists!! Only we are exactly the same, but are blind to our failings. This narrative plays on our conceited, flabby, unreasoned thinking. But its nice to laugh to others, eh? Science to me, is the application of the scientific method. This is to say that whatever is being looked at should be repeatable, and consistently provide the same results. Strictly speaking, when we say we know,…

> has anyone here ever used an electron microscope?

I am not a scientist, but yes. It’s not that hard to directly access most scientific tools. Verification takes effort, but random verification should reasonably give you confidence and can be a fun project on it’s own. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVbdbVhzcM4

PS: One of the most famous experiments off all time is replicated whenever you can something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#45

Post by konjin »

ruricolist wrote: post #15

Mongols.

A civilization stops scientific activity when you kill its scientists and burn its libraries. Who would have thought?

How much science would get done in the US if everyone in the 50 largest cities is killed or enslaved and the cities are razed?

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#47

Post by mrwnmonm »

mda wrote: post #19

Why does the article focus on "Arabic"? I think "Islamic" or "Muslim" would be a better term as large percentage of scientists and philosophers of the time were not Arabs but of Persian, Moore, Turkic origin.

Because atheists and christians don't like that. No other reason.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#48

Post by netcan »

jariel wrote: post #43
netcan wrote: post #28

The problem with theorizing about such things is that, being untestable, it's very hard to distinguish between our own narrative biases and objectivity. Maybe the golden age was a byproduct of imperialism. Not many naked imperialists out there anymore, but the arguments are easy enough to make. The US, The USSR... both with some stunning scientific achievements (eg nuclear physics, space travel, physics) achievements…

So that's a very good point. The 'rise of Arabic Science' was totally consistent with conquest. It seems there's a lot of hubris in Science, just like Imperialism, Art, etc. - and you need a lot of 'excess wealth' to delve into things that are not 'subsistence'. The Renaissance probably would not have happened without the concentration of wealth in Venice and nearby areas. I mean who on Earth is going to pay for thos…

My point is that any such theory is untestable, and we're good at convincing ourselves of "truths" that appeal to us. A 19th century nationalist would have liked your first sentence. A 19th century marxist would have liked your second and third one.

Any one of them can be challenged with counterexamples. EG, a great modern cognate to Venetian lords and bishops pouring money into prestige projects are the gulf Emirs. Yet...

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#49

Post by gomox »

feralimal wrote: post #34

Ha ha - primitive Islamic religionists!! Only we are exactly the same, but are blind to our failings. This narrative plays on our conceited, flabby, unreasoned thinking. But its nice to laugh to others, eh? Science to me, is the application of the scientific method. This is to say that whatever is being looked at should be repeatable, and consistently provide the same results. Strictly speaking, when we say we know,…

Science and religion are belief systems and therefore share some commonalities but the radical difference is that science is based on testable hypothesis, whereas religion is just religion.

To say they are "absolutely equivalent" is a massive stretch.

Re: Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

#50

Post by feralimal »

gomox wrote: post #49
feralimal wrote: post #34

Ha ha - primitive Islamic religionists!! Only we are exactly the same, but are blind to our failings. This narrative plays on our conceited, flabby, unreasoned thinking. But its nice to laugh to others, eh? Science to me, is the application of the scientific method. This is to say that whatever is being looked at should be repeatable, and consistently provide the same results. Strictly speaking, when we say we know,…

Science and religion are belief systems and therefore share some commonalities but the radical difference is that science is based on testable hypothesis, whereas religion is just religion. To say they are "absolutely equivalent" is a massive stretch.

Do you personally test any scientific claims? Or do you personally take them on faith?
Post reply on HN