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

341–350 of 413 posts

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

#341

Post by tooltalk »

dragontamer wrote: post #325
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…

> Why not the Middle east? When Japan was conquered by USA in 1940s, the USA treated it with much more respect than the Europeans did vs the Ottoman Empire from WW1. As a result, Japan was able to regrow into a world power. While the countries that formerly constituted the Ottomans are under a constant civil war (and major military groups, like ISIS, dream of re-establishing a religious empire of old: https://en.wiki…

>> the USA treated it with much more respect ...

the looming threat of communism from Russia and China played an important role in US's post-war policy in Japan and Japan's immediate post war recovery. While Japan was allowed to stay united as one, the Korean peninsula was divided, though the territory was never part of the WW2 theater. The Korean civil war led by the communist North likewise boosted Japan's quick recovery.

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

#342

Post by pvaldes »

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,…

> But no one - NO ONE - is verifying anything personally. No one is testing the claims. My point is that no one is personally verifying science

Each science article is extensively reviewed. First when you need to force yourself to read previous articles in the same field. Second by your boss and other members in the team. Third time by a peers system, and is not easy at all to pass. Sometimes must be corrected two or three times more. Often is rejected and sent to other journal, that will require the same process. Journals can ask for your laboratory notes and raw data and repeat the calculus by themselves. Is not unusual.

After an article is published anybody can point to something found incorrect on it.

So the truth is that science, the real science, is extensively reviewed. There are groups specially prone to fraud, and many articles are garbage, but are most the exception than the norm.

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

#343

Post by throwaway413 »

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 already know when you read “Arabic world” vs Arab world...

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

#344

Post by throwaway413 »

pvaldes wrote: post #335
yamrzou wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Tell me, what do cartoons have to do with good science?

The whole point of Islam being against people in artwork, is to reduce egoism and superficiality. To not put anyone on a pedestal. Sure, it’s quite an extreme take, however...

Would you disagree that this is an issue in modern society? Selfies and social media perception above real life?

Not saying I agree in any absolute fashion with “no people in art” etc, but to argue in bad faith against Islam’s scientific position is just obtuse and argumentative. There is merit there.

And of course, this should go without saying but sadly cannot: extremist Muslims who commit violence in the name of these beliefs are horrible and wrong and guess what - not actually considered to be “good Muslims” by any true good Muslims out there, who value their fellow humans as also prescribed by their faith.

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

#345

Post by newen »

ginko wrote: post #220
mrwnmonm wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, that happened in Egypt, and the US were very much happy to support a coup that undone everything gained by the Egyption revolution.

Why do you believe the US supported the 2013 coup?

https://theintercept.com/2014/10/02/feigned-american-support...

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

#346

Post by newen »

simonh wrote: post #222
mrwnmonm wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, that happened in Egypt, and the US were very much happy to support a coup that undone everything gained by the Egyption revolution.

The US has no say in the internal politics of Egypt, or any Arab countries. The most the West can do is stand by watching in horror, wringing our hands. When we do get mired in it, as with Iraq, the limits of our actual ability to direct change becomes painfully apparent very quickly.

https://theintercept.com/2014/10/02/feigned-american-support...

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

#347

Post by Shorel »

GuB-42 wrote: post #133
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,…

Many people consider science like a religion. For example, many people don't understand evolution, they think some magic force gradually turned fishes into humans. No wonder it is sometimes put on the same level as creationism. But to be honest, it doesn't really matter. If you are not a scientist, faith is a shortcut that allows you to focus more on what matters more to you. The difference is that you don't need fai…

One of the issues with teaching evolution is the brain-dead treatment that it has in films and television.

No, if you start with cellular life you will not get to humans every time. You can't even be sure you will get to fish or other animals with internal skeletons.

So many random things can be different at each step of the chain and there are so many steps, millions of them.

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

#348

Post by masterphilo »

netcan wrote: post #70
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…

I paused at that paragraph as well. It is very possible that the achievements of modernity have changed the game. That said, the game was (is?) rise and fall. Rising civilizations leave a heritage to be mined, so there is an overall direction of rise... but every one of the many scientifically advancing cultures in history has declined. It would be prudent to expect the same for ours. That said, modernity has almost…

There's common interests between the nations and modern technologies have helped facilitate the exchange of both goods and ideas, but I doubt if we can call ourselves a "global civilization" just yet. That would mean some sort of world government, which we definitely don't have. And to me, that just means that the rules of the game haven't changed at all.

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

#349

Post by Retric »

feralimal wrote: post #327
Retric wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> with CGI technology being as good as it is, we still cannot be sure nowadays. CGI is still extremely limited. There is an ever expanding list of things that can be reasonably faked, but high definition turbulent flows for example are not one of them. Now you personally may simply not know where that line is, but that doesn’t mean nobody does. Which is my point, your personal level of ignorance isn’t universal. Scie…

You are engaging with my argument - it is not a personal attack, and I don't take it that way. You say I'm ignorant. My response is that you are over-stating the level of your knowledge. Do you really know what is possible with CGI? You may be an expert in the field, but can you really say that? Is it possible that the military, google, the Russians, or someone else, has an advance on what you believe to be the cutti…

I agree that for many people a slick video is enough. I personally devoted a significant chunk of my life to avoid that which simply isn’t tenable for most people. Still looking into the mechanics of say DNA deep doing to encounter chromatin means you can start to reason about what’s actually happening. Keep building a slightly more than superficial understanding of everything from Architecture to Quantum Mechanics and eventually you run out of major fields of study. It’s far from comprehensive and you really need to focus after that, but it’s something.

So sure, I don’t know the exact CGI line, but it’s something I know quite a lot about. Could a ‘deep fake’ style video effectively be good enough to be indistinguishable from someone actually talking? I suspect not yet, but I wouldn’t want to take the bet. But I know enough to realize the specifics around chaotic fluid simulation is a vastly higher hurdle due to the underlying computation involved.

Granted, drawing that line requires an understanding of what Military’s can pull off, which ultimately comes down to physics and economics. Now, I have actually done R&D for them so take of this what you will. It used to be military hardware had a huge leg up, but that’s far less the case today.

Getting to the point where you hear someone say “salt used to be worth as much as gold” and you think “that’s got to be BS” doesn’t take a deep understanding of history, just a supernatural understanding of a few related topics.

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

#350

Post by nradov »

ecopoesis wrote: post #338
nradov wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I didn't quote a 0.35% death rate. That represents a possible upper bound on IFR based on data so far. Even in a worst case scenario it is impossible for 100% of Americans to be infected. Your simplistic estimate is missing critical variables.

I never claimed that any number of deaths is "okay" so stop arguing in bad faith and putting words in my mouth. Panicking is irrational and never helpful. We need rational, science-based policies now more than ever.

Certainly we should save as many lives as possible, but we can't get tunnel vision and focus on COVID-19 to the exclusion of all else. The lockdowns also kill people. They die slowly from lack of medical care, depression, substance abuse, and suicide but in the end they're dead all the same. It's like trying to run a business by focusing entirely on revenue and ignoring costs.

Post reply on HN