Live data from Hacker News

Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)

thenewatlantis.com

391–400 of 413 posts

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

#391
post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It goes on to talk about its usage of "Arabic science" at the beginning of the second section. "A preliminary caution must be taken about both parts of the term “Arabic science.” This is, first, because the scientists discussed here were not all Arab Muslims. Indeed, most of the greatest thinkers of the era were not ethnically Arab. This is not surprising considering that, for several centuries throughout the Middle…

So why did they use Islam in the beginning?

USA's foreign interference is certainly important to talk about. But I would really like to hear your opinion on the meat of the article.

Its main point is that Islam's rules apply to public and personal life so universities and government budgets get controlled by religion. Fundamentalism retards scientific discovery. (I was taught fundamentalism as a child and I confirm this is true.) So when fundamentalism spread through the Islamic world, they stopped discovering new science.

A second point is that Arab culture doesn't value science. The Abbasid empire was controlled by Arabs. The empire translated scientific literature into Arabic for political reasons, not for the pursuit of knowledge. The existence of the large body of accessible scientific literature enabled highly intelligent folks to make scientific progress. The translation was not done in enduring institutions like universities. So the Golden Age of Arabic Science happened by accident, not because Arab culture or the empire valued scientific progress.

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

#392

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"…

I feel we're on decline, because "science, bitch" is used to harass people into doing something they don't want or not ready. And people generally don't like to be harassed, they begin to resist no matter how reasonable things you're talking about are. I wish society could pick its battles more carefully.

I agree, science has become a club to beat people into submission with (justified or not).

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

#393
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...rich people happen where there are bottlenecks in trade. I was nodding all the way until "bottlenecks in"... and then the Expanse slang. Tsk tsk :)

For the bottlenecks: I like to think of value chains as a young seasonal river. In season, there are alternations of pools and waterfalls, and exploitable margins are where the topography protrudes, at the waterfalls. In the pools the topography still exists, but doesn't matter. Until it does, because something changes significantly upstream or downstream, and now the waterfalls appear in different places. Kowltim ve…

Too complex metaphor for me. If I've understood you, the flow is not exactly the trade. That's open to a lot of distracting objections. Beautiful anyway :)

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

#394
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Have you seen evolution? What proved evolution to you personally? I would expect that you were presented with Darwin and evolution at school and accepted. With no verification. You were propagandised. Just like creationists.

There is direct / first-hand knowledge and there is indirect / second-hand knowledge. Both have their legit place.

You insist to declare the direct knowledge as the only knowledge. That's pure sophistry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophist#Modern_usage

Every time you enter a building, you accept as fact the science behind all the engineering which keeps the building safe and sound.

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

#395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Science happens where there are rich people; rich people happen where there are bottlenecks in trade. It can't be that simple. How do you fit there, for example, russian space exploration?

Easy: the КПСС was the bottleneck between the oil and natural gas fields of the Union and the fuel importers of the West. They were the funders of the Космическая программа СССР from the 1930s on. Two things happened in 1985: KSA opened the taps to full production, tanking oil prices, and the Plaza Accord weakened the dollar. Since oil is denominated in USD, this further kneecapped soviet hard currency income. While…

TIL ..a lot. Thanks.

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

#396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why did they use Islam in the beginning?

USA's foreign interference is certainly important to talk about. But I would really like to hear your opinion on the meat of the article. Its main point is that Islam's rules apply to public and personal life so universities and government budgets get controlled by religion. Fundamentalism retards scientific discovery. (I was taught fundamentalism as a child and I confirm this is true.) So when fundamentalism spread…

I believe that religion should not enforce any rules on scientific study.

That being said, it would require (for me at least) some study to prove some of the claims you made.

Egypt, while has a majority of muslims, is a secular country. Not in the sense that they have some worldview and understanding in political systems, they just don't rule with religion. So, I wasn't taught much about religion in my studying years.

So, claims like "Arab culture doesn't value science" and "translated scientific literature into Arabic for political reasons, not for the pursuit of knowledge", would require me to read a lot in history to make a judgement.

For example, I know that the chemistry that existed in their days was actually alchemy, so I think it was reasonable for them to reject it.

The part of "Translations were for political reasons" needs a lot of research, or maybe I just don't know about it.

I also think that those boundaries between cultures are almost gone by now. While there are some extreme groups (which I believe it does exist everywhere), young people here worship Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo, and old people have their version of Fox News. It is the same shit everywhere. They don't have a 'culture' or some philosophy to reject science using it as you might think. They know nothing about Islam, and they know nothing about science. That is the majority of people, not all of them of course.

I will exclude from that most of the young people who were active during the revolution. While the revolution changed us and made us more open to the world, it was a huge shock. [You might find this interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tTdlSzIANo]

I realize that the situation was fucked up before the US gets into the picture. But a lot of people realized now that we need a real change and they will accept a lot of western ideas more than you think. But we saw the people getting killed in the streets, and the US supported the killer happily. So I don't really know where the situation goes from here.

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

#397
post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the bottlenecks: I like to think of value chains as a young seasonal river. In season, there are alternations of pools and waterfalls, and exploitable margins are where the topography protrudes, at the waterfalls. In the pools the topography still exists, but doesn't matter. Until it does, because something changes significantly upstream or downstream, and now the waterfalls appear in different places. Kowltim ve…

Too complex metaphor for me. If I've understood you, the flow is not exactly the trade. That's open to a lot of distracting objections. Beautiful anyway :)

Thank you. Maybe it's easier to recover the river from the optimisation case: we profile first, then optimise. This is because the only things that count are what actually eat wall clock time. Similarly, the only places in value chains that accumulate wealth are where there are actually consistent margins. And it doesn't matter if there are rocks in a riverbed (which could potentially make bottlenecks or waterfalls), if they're located in a pool between higher rocks, so the water level is higher than they are.

Does that make more sense?

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

#398
post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watched it. Issues I have with the video you provided. I can't believe that this passes muster with you as a scientist. I can't help but notice the gas he creates at first is white in colour. In the second the gas is clear in colour. Both white and colourless gas are the same apparently. The difference in colour is not explained. In the second experiment, Brian Cox says he is using hydrogen + AIR (not oxygen). Air…

See? I knew you'd be saying that. Ipso facto, I won. All the best.

That you think that video is proof of water being h2o, says all I need to know about what you think of the scientific method!

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

#399
post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See? I knew you'd be saying that. Ipso facto, I won. All the best.

That you think that video is proof of water being h2o, says all I need to know about what you think of the scientific method!

Losing the argument sucks right? Guess you'll have to get use to it. I know I'm right while you do not know, so you're wrong. It's hard to argue against pure logic like mine... Maybe one day you'll understand.

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

#400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The period from 1947-2014 didn't really lead to major improvements in scientific ecosystems, apart from creation of few educational institutes (IITs, IISc). The left-wing governments weren't much better. The problem is much deeper than a simplistic left-wing vs right-wing debate.

> The period from 1947-2014 didn't really lead to major improvements in scientific ecosystems, apart from creation of few educational institutes (IITs, IISc). And I guess institutions like: Defence Research and Development Organisations (DRDO), Indian Space Research Organisation, Baba Atomic Resarch Centre, Hindustan Aeronautical Limited, Defence Research and Development Laboratories, Ordnance Factory Board Council o…

You are right. Starting with almost nothing, the first Indian governments had a lot of scope for development. The list of institutions has had some effect on the society, and to the areas around them mainly in South India. Some of the previous governments really led to improvement (specially during Congress' Indira Gandhi's time and BJP's Atal Bihari Vajpayee's time) in certain areas.

But that is not enough. Science is still not a viable career for large percentage of the population, most of the technologies (specially commercial) are still imported, there aren't many companies in the private sector which are innovating.

Unfortunately none of the current political leadership across political parties give any confidence in this area. The current ruling party wants to live in the glory of the past and give comments about imaginary times. The main opposition party doesn't even try to promise anything better. Since Indira Gandhi, none in Congress have even tried to include science in the election manifesto in any major way. The previous UPA government was a big let down in this area. The other marginal national parties and regional parties are even worse. They don't even pretend to improve anything in this area.

Post reply on HN