Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) • Hacker News Board

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

#181

Post by captain_price7 » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

tgflynn wrote: post #131

This article makes for an interesting read. I'm not qualified to evaluate its historical claims but its claims about the current state of science in the Muslim world don't agree with what little knowledge I have in that area. That knowledge comes from having been acquainted with a number of Muslim students and scientists both in the US and in France. I did not at all get the impression that they came from a culture t…

I'm from a 3rd world Muslim country, I also agree that the number of people who actively oppose "western education" is extremely small. They are on the fringe even in the rural, comparatively religious society I grew up in.

It's important to remember that most people don't really worry about this kind of ideological questions, like whether studying in university is incompatible with Quran. Hell, most people don't even know what's in Quran. So at least in contemporary world, I think lack of Muslim progress is better explained by poverty and not through those ideological analyses.

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

#182

Post by swiley » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:28 PM UTC

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #180

helen___keller wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question, why should we be so concerned that they were wrong the first time? You say > admitting they don't know (which is the only acceptable scientific answer when you can't back up a claim with reproducible experiments). But what kind of response is that really, when there's an infectious disease and the center for disease control tells the public "We have no clue what the appropriate response is, we're go…

> On the contrary, the ONLY ethical way for the CDC to act in the face of an emerging (potential) crisis is recommendations based on the current beliefs of the organization This is debatable, but in any case, is it excusable for the CDC to hold beliefs that are so badly wrong in the first place? Especially in the face of evidence from the rest of the world?

It probably wouldn't have been so bad if they weren't considered the profits of science and instead just experts that might have the wrong idea.

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

#183

Post by finnthehuman » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

helen___keller wrote: post #142

merpnderp wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But was it medical science when the CDC advised people, very strongly, to not wear masks or that the virus coming out of Wuhan was of no concern to everyday Americans? How are people supposed to believe in capital 'S' science when our scientific institutions make claims based on their guts instead of just admitting they don't know (which is the only acceptable scientific answer when you can't back up a claim with rep…

Serious question, why should we be so concerned that they were wrong the first time? You say > admitting they don't know (which is the only acceptable scientific answer when you can't back up a claim with reproducible experiments). But what kind of response is that really, when there's an infectious disease and the center for disease control tells the public "We have no clue what the appropriate response is, we're go…

>Serious question, why should we be so concerned that they were wrong the first time?

To properly calibrate how we treat their recommendations.

I'm most sympathetic to the CDC, because everyone spreading their message are con men. In the most classic of senses, literal con men. They tell me they have the must-be-believed scoop, up until they're found out. Then they have an excuse for why I was wrong for coming away from our interaction with the perception that their preliminary statements should be taken as seriously as I did. But now, this time, today, the have the real must-be-believed scoop that I can trust.

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

#184

Post by bg117 » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

simonh wrote: post #90

The reason for this is that historically most civilizations, or phases of civilizations have lacked two things. One is the strong, persistent social institutions needed to maintain the momentum of scientific progress. The other is a solid socialised understanding of scientific methods. To maintain consistent scientific and engineering development you need both, and possibly a third in the from of the printing press,…

There were more than one university in India thousand years back and hosted thousands of students. Islamic Invasions destroyed the culture.

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

#185

Post by webmobdev » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:31 PM UTC

simonh wrote: post #90

The reason for this is that historically most civilizations, or phases of civilizations have lacked two things. One is the strong, persistent social institutions needed to maintain the momentum of scientific progress. The other is a solid socialised understanding of scientific methods. To maintain consistent scientific and engineering development you need both, and possibly a third in the from of the printing press,…

More than all of this - the key is political leaders. Visionary political leaders make or break their country or end civilizations. Both India and America are witnessing this currently with their respective elected right-wing "leaders" in Narendra Modi and Donald Trump.

In India Astrology is now being treated as a Science and the Modi government is considering allowing alternate medicine (Ayurveda / Homeopathy / Unani) "doctors" to prescribe allopathic medicines.

This when India's first Prime Minister sought to promote "scientific temper" in independent India:

> "[What is needed] is the scientific approach, the adventurous and yet critical temper of science, the search for truth and new knowledge, the refusal to accept anything without testing and trial, the capacity to change previous conclusions in the face of new evidence, the reliance on observed fact and not on pre-conceived theory, the hard discipline of the mind—all this is necessary, not merely for the application of science but for life itself and the solution of its many problems." —Jawaharlal Nehru (1946) The Discovery of India

And the constitution of India itself emphasises:

> [It shall be the duty of every citizen of India] To develop scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.

Political leaders are the key, and the answer to why science and culture flourish and die in any civilization. The west will experience this too.

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

#186

Post by Mediterraneo10 » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:34 PM UTC

bg117 wrote: post #179

If not for the invasion by outside forces like (Turks/Mongols) from around 11th century in present day India, the scientific culture would not have been broken. Invaders destroyed Nalanda university in present day Bihar during one such invasion. Destroying knowledge is the goto activity by invaders and this continues to this day under ISIS also.

India's learning tradition destroyed at that point in history is more the destruction of philosophy and philology, not so much the hard sciences as in the case of the Arab world which had made considerable strides in these centuries. Unfortunately, many people on this STEM-focused forum probably are not greatly concerned with e.g. the destruction of fora for debating Mahayana Buddhist metaphysics.

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

#187

Post by hannofcart » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:35 PM UTC

bobdupneu wrote: post #79

What an elaborate piece of nonsense ! Modern science needs money, human capital and democracy. Some Arab countries have money but have to use it to buy western consumer goods rather than invest it in knowledge or their own production capacity -- otherwise a coup might happen. Autocratic Arab rulers are also understandably reluctant to invest in human capital. Knowledge and critical thinking are the basis of any scien…

The Islamic world has no exclusive monopoly on inept, corrupt, undemocratic overlords.

Notable examples of regions afflicted by the same problem are the entire Soviet bloc. And China. And yet these are typically at the vanguard of scientific and technological development.

The Soviets beat the Americans to space under exactly that class of autocratic ruling elite.

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

#188

Post by webmobdev » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:37 PM UTC

bg117 wrote: post #184

simonh wrote: post #90

The reason for this is that historically most civilizations, or phases of civilizations have lacked two things. One is the strong, persistent social institutions needed to maintain the momentum of scientific progress. The other is a solid socialised understanding of scientific methods. To maintain consistent scientific and engineering development you need both, and possibly a third in the from of the printing press,…

There were more than one university in India thousand years back and hosted thousands of students. Islamic Invasions destroyed the culture.

And the Mongols destroyed the Islamic empire. All that's in the past, and it feels good to live in the imagined glory of the past - but what's the excuse today for us indians when our idiot Prime Minister Narendra Modi claims that ancient India had nuclear weapons, aeroplanes and spacecraft and did inter-species head transplant by citing religious mythology as the proof for it? Or when his government wants to promote Astrology as Science today??

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

#189

Post by luckylion » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:39 PM UTC

kickopotomus wrote: post #172

merpnderp wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But was it medical science when the CDC advised people, very strongly, to not wear masks or that the virus coming out of Wuhan was of no concern to everyday Americans? How are people supposed to believe in capital 'S' science when our scientific institutions make claims based on their guts instead of just admitting they don't know (which is the only acceptable scientific answer when you can't back up a claim with rep…

I think this, again, stems from a general misunderstanding of what science is. Science is a method of drawing conclusions about data. Sometimes, those initial conclusions can be misguided by incomplete data. The world discovered this virus less than a year ago. It takes some time to determine the different transmission vectors and risk factors associated with each. The CDC did not make a claim based on their "guts".…

1) sounds like an argument looked for after the fact. Masks were recommended initially especially because they stop you from touching your face and would train you not to do so.

2) doesn't make sense to me: because masks aren't perfect and some people refusing to wear masks makes them less efficient they'd advise to not wear masks at all?

3) is a political stance, not a scientific one.

Would people have reacted differently to masks if they weren't intentionally mislead on so many levels about Covid-19 in general (the WHO losing a lot of credibility) and the efficacy of masks? When you have people who are skeptical of the government, and the government lies to them and gets caught, won't that make them even more skeptical of whatever the government says next?

I don't think there ever was a scientific consensus that masks aren't effective against airborne diseases. There was a political decision, and that can change any time, but it has nothing to do with data collection or the scientific method.

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

#190

Post by Mediterraneo10 » Fri, Oct 09, 2020, 2:39 PM UTC

wrnr wrote: post #116

I just love facts like this: Although Spain is hardly an intellectual superpower, it translates more books in a single year than the entire Arab world has in the past thousand years. The links to the UN report seems to check out, but on the other hand I've heart that publishing is not a very lucrative business in Arabia and most translations are fan translations

It also has to do with translations in the Arab world being made into Modern Standard Arabic, a somewhat artificial language that is totally different from the local dialect people actually speak. Arabs don't want to read books in MSA just like younger generations of Greeks don't want to read books in katharevousa.

And in the Maghreb, French has become established as the language of literature and magazines, so those peoples are doubly aloof from MSA.