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

331–340 of 413 posts

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

#331

Post by dragontamer »

rsynnott wrote: post #223
pjc50 wrote: post #13

> "We will turn to this question later, but it is important to keep in mind that the decline of scientific activity is the rule, not the exception, of civilizations. While it is commonplace to assume that the scientific revolution and the progress of technology were inevitable, in fact the West is the single sustained success story out of many civilizations with periods of scientific flourishing. Like the Muslims, th…

> Japan went from insular agrarianism to a world power to collapse to continued scientific development through to the 21st century. As did much of the Far East. Why not the Middle east? There are lots of theories, of course, but one I find interesting is that East Asia, in addition to never being colonized to the same extent as most places, emerged with national boundaries largely intact. The Middle East was under fo…

> (Romans -> Ottomans -> mandates)

Hittites -> Assyrians -> Babylonians -> Macedonia (aka Alexander the Great) -> Egyptian -> Romans -> Byzantine -> Mongols -> Ottomans

That area has been locked in war and conquest for pretty much all of human history.

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

#332

Post by pvaldes »

mrwnmonm wrote: post #62

I am an Arab and I am pretty sure the article is full of misinformation before even reading it, but will read it anyway. Take the first paragraph > Contemporary Islam is not known for its engagement in the modern scientific project. But it is heir to a legendary “Golden Age” of Arabic science frequently invoked by commentators hoping to make Muslims and Westerners more respectful and understanding of each other. Pres…

You don't need to have a democracy to do science. Many great scientists in Europe or Asia were able to work in the context of absolute monarchies, terrible dictators or a context of patronage. None of those were "democratic" at all.

Having a true democracy would be a bless for sure, but don't think that will magically produce scientists, or revolutionary new points of view. You need to seed, nurture, care for and harvest decades later. And this is one of the causes of decline of science. Everybody is now planned, arranged and forced to fit in chunks of 4 years, so the people now in power can take all the credit.

As bad as dictators are, a stable dictatorship could ironically lead to a much more comfortable environment for scientists than a democracy. The first thing that many politicians do after stepping in power is to fire the scientists identified with the previous government (or discredit their work, or remove their funds...).

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

#333

Post by resiros »

travisoneill1 wrote: post #217
kmeisthax wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why not the Middle East? Well, when your region of the world has been torn asunder by everything, including colonial powers, fascist reactionaries and nationalists, liberal market economies, and international communism; the only remaining cultural artifact that you can call your own is religion. If you want to unify the Middle East, you have to do so under the guise of religion, and in practice that means conservati…

The vast majority of emigrants from the middle east are poor migrants to Europe, not educated scientists.

That's not the point. The point is that the majority of educated scientists in the middle east emigrated to Europe!

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

#334

Post by BrandoElFollito »

_8091149529 wrote: post #283
thom_nic wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's always the risk that the West might internally reject the scientific revolution. In the US I am pretty sure we are already on the decline. I think it has to do with, during the industrial revolution and post-war, huge scientific advancements and tech grew the economy, fed capitalism by means of providing new desirable goods to consumers (e.g. dishwashers, nicer cars, etc.) I wonder if we've reached a "peak"…

Agree with sentiments of the parent comment. I believe the prestige and social standing of physics (and, in part, the academia as a whole) is founded in the truly transformational technological advances -- say, the transistor -- made in the past decades. Problematically, to secure funding today, one is essentially expected to frame every condensed-matter experiment as the next transistor. Not only in grant applicatio…

I studied physics because I liked it and the way it describes our world. I then went for a PhD and slowly realized that physics (except a few areas) is basically dead. Particle physics for instance deal with completely outwordly stuff, akin to planning a family trip to Jupiter. Sure, it may happen someday but there are more present things.

I got my PhD and left academia (because of this and petty politics around photocopier paper costs) and the only part I really miss is the teaching and the bright minds.

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

#335

Post by pvaldes »

yamrzou wrote: post #299
diegoholiveira wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would guess that Islam have no issues with good science, right? In my opinion, blaming religion for any decline of science is completely accepted even if there's no direct correlation between both, which is very bad because it's creates a false believe that religious people aren't educated.

Islam has no issues with good science. On the contrary, the Quran has some verses which encourage enquiry, such as: "Say: 'Travel through the earth, and reflect on how he [god] started the creation." - 20 Al-'Ankabut.

> Islam has no issues with good science

As long as it does not come in form of satiric cartoons, it seems...

Free speech without blasphemy laws, and being able to express new ideas or discuss new points of view without fearing to lose your life by that, is -absolutely- essential for having good science.

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

#336

Post by prewett »

godelzilla wrote: post #221
blackbear_ wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We would soon learn the difference between knowing and believing. Well said, and it's not always so easy. Skepticism and critical thinking are in very short supply, that is true, and we should all try to verify as much as possible. But really, most things cannot be verified by you, personally. We do stand on the shoulders of giants, and you will not be able to verify centuries of scientific progress all on your own…

>you will not be able to verify centuries of scientific progress all on your own, from first principles. And this becomes even harder when you approach the softer parts of human knowledge such as economics TBH most of economics is non-empirical ideology that's easy to debunk. More generally pseudo-science is rampant in "western science". That's another reason why this article is so ironic/islamophobic.

The author is critical of Islam, but that is hardly "islamophobic": at no point in the article does the author indicate any fear of Islam, which is what the "-phobic" construction means. "-phobic" does not mean "says negative things about" and especially does not mean "disagrees with", despite the way it's frequently used.

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

#337

Post by Shorel »

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,…

Except science is not static like religion, it changes with new discoveries and explanations.

And, at high school level, basic science is tested and experiments are repeated.

So at the very least, some people learn proper scientific thinking, while others just learn to repeat "facts".

In contrast, everything that religion is, is just memorization of some old ideas, and treating personal anecdotes and made up stories like they are statistically significant data.

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

#338

Post by ecopoesis »

nradov wrote: post #287
ecopoesis wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine being so callous to think that the preventable deaths of 1,148,700 of your fellow Americans is okay.

Imagine trying to derail the discussion with unscientific appeals to emotion. Obviously no one is okay with extra deaths, so you're arguing against a strawman. So far there have been about 218,000 American deaths. There is no scientific basis for your 1,148,700 number. The only way we could have prevented all of the American deaths would have been by completely sealing our borders back in December, but at the time no…

You quote a 0.35% death rate. Google says there are 328.2 million Americans. Do the math.

It's amusing for someone arguing "science" to be unable to multiple two fucking numbers.

You are saying 1,148,700 deaths is okay, that people are "panicking" for no reason. A 40% increase in death rate (the CDC says there were 2,813,503 deaths in 2019) seems like a pretty reasonable reason to "panic".

Trying to save a sixth of a Holocaust seems like decent public policy.

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

#339

Post by mixmastamyk »

dragontamer wrote: post #331
rsynnott wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Japan went from insular agrarianism to a world power to collapse to continued scientific development through to the 21st century. As did much of the Far East. Why not the Middle east? There are lots of theories, of course, but one I find interesting is that East Asia, in addition to never being colonized to the same extent as most places, emerged with national boundaries largely intact. The Middle East was under fo…

> (Romans -> Ottomans -> mandates) Hittites -> Assyrians -> Babylonians -> Macedonia (aka Alexander the Great) -> Egyptian -> Romans -> Byzantine -> Mongols -> Ottomans That area has been locked in war and conquest for pretty much all of human history.

Well, it is in the "middle."

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

#340

Post by [deleted] »

mrwnmonm wrote: post #62

I am an Arab and I am pretty sure the article is full of misinformation before even reading it, but will read it anyway. Take the first paragraph > Contemporary Islam is not known for its engagement in the modern scientific project. But it is heir to a legendary “Golden Age” of Arabic science frequently invoked by commentators hoping to make Muslims and Westerners more respectful and understanding of each other. Pres…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN