Utopia Temple
Main Forum Page Register an Account for Free! Calendar Frequently Asked Questions about this Board View New Posts Advanced Search Login
  Utopia Temple Forums > General Discussions > Respectable General Discussions > Religious Discussions

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Post New Thread Reply
Author Thread
Posts: 2724/2825
(19-Jul-2011 at 08:38)


Re: Complex mathematical problem solved by bees

Originally Posted by Armitage: View Post
Christianity has not nurished the development of science in Europe as far as i know. You could hae provided an example to undermine your statement. As for now i dont believe it.
If this is meant for me then this depends. There are a few fields that have been nourished by Christianity but yes by far and large scientific advancement was usually connected with the points where the church was weakene

Quote:
I fairly doubt your expertise in this topic VoR. Its a known paradigma that there was a knowledge transfer from the East to the West. The West even forgot its own achivements and it was the Muslims who - enabled by a religion that promoted seeking knowledge - sought knowledge, compiled it and developed it further.
Not so much. The real knowledge treasures in the East are China and India and the pre islam civlisations. In fact I remember right the Great Civlisations are as follows: Sumerian, Babylonian, Egyptian, Indian, Chinese and Grecko Roman.



Quote:
Let me compile the reasons of the Muslims to seek knowledge:
.
Seeking knowledge is not enough. You have to do it the right way as well. Which is difficult with religion especially one as well invasive as Islam. A scientist has to be objective and question everything. This is hard when you are faced with a religion who claims absolute truths

Quote:
Then why is all the science coming from Christian countries?
Economy. We made the the economic jump that allowed us to invest time and money to get a headstart on science. That and the stronghold of religion was severely weakened. Also I forgot the exact details but I do seem to remember(although I could be wrong on this) that Islam had some ideological problems with banks or something similar which gives them a severe disadvantage.

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views
#21  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 611/611
(19-Jul-2011 at 10:43)


VoR your comparison of 4 Muslim scientists vs the 156 Christian ones is silly beause of the exponential growth of knowledge.


Muslims took the knowledge of their time compiled it and developed it further (for example Abū 'l-Khayr who authored an botanical encyclopedia citing from greek sources and surpassed his greek predecessor in quality and quantity by long with his work Kitab al-Filaha, this again is an example for the development of science my Muslim scientists).

The Europeans took that knowledge, translated it and developed it further. That is the reason why you have a disparity of numbers.

Disparity of numbers between the Greeks and Muslims, and Muslims and modern scientists.

Its like a tree that branches out. The beginnings are humble, the greeks, indians and other civilisations contributing to primary thoughts. Muslims contributed to these root developments and compiled them to one trunk, the Europeans branched out, specialising in the various subjects.

Notice also that many of the Muslim scientists were polimaths. Europeans on the other hands had their last truth polimath with Humbolt or Newton perhaps. After that you have people who are experts on certain subjects.

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)
#22  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Armitage Add Armitage to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 6625/7006
(19-Jul-2011 at 12:41)


Originally Posted by Armitage:
VoR your comparison of 4 Muslim scientists vs the 156 Christian ones is silly beause of the exponential growth of knowledge.
Of course you don't like it, because it proves how wrong you are, but there is nothing silly about it.

Yes, there has been an exponential growth of knowledge, *but not in Islam*.
You keep bullshitting that Islam encourages knowledge and Christianity doesn't. If that were true, then this exponential growth would be happening in Islamic countries more than in Christian countries, but that is not the reality. Understand yet?

The reality is that Islamic countries have lousy education systems, hardly any universities, and as a result have poorly educated populations. Explain to me how that is encouraging knowledge.


Quote:
for example Abū 'l-Khayr who authored an botanical encyclopedia citing from greek sources and surpassed his greek predecessor in quality and quantity by long with his work Kitab al-Filaha, this again is an example for the development of science my Muslim scientists
Abu l-Khayr - AKA "the tree planter". It says a lot that in your desperation to find a Muslim who contributed anything to science, you are reduced to the Filaha texts, which are basically farmers instruction books.

The problem is that, even while pretending that a farming manual is science, you still fail. Kitab al-Filaha, and the anonymous Umdat al-tabib that *might* be l-Khayr, are compendiums. Let me spell that out: C-O-M-P-E-N-D-I-U-M-S. That means he made one, or maybe two, collections of *what other people had discovered*.

Essentially he took a load of stuff from the Greeks Aristotle and Democritus, the Romans Anatolius and Cassianus Bassus Scholasticus, and added some local knowledge about fertilisers etc. Actual new knowledge generated by Muslims? Minimal, if any.

The Filaha texts are interesting and worth studying, particularly in the light of current interest in organic farming, but their interest lies in their status as repositories of traditional farming knowledge of the time. Your attempt to elevate them to groundbreaking scientific treatises full of Muslim science is really quite pathetic. They are no more science than Culpepper's Colour Herbal.


Quote:
The Europeans took that knowledge, translated it and developed it further.
For the second time...

"More significantly, look at the ones with (founder) after their names. Founders are the ones who have sought out new knowledge and developed whole new areas of science. All but one is Christian, *and there is not a single Muslim amongst them*."


Quote:
Its like a tree that branches out. The beginnings are humble, the greeks, indians and other civilisations contributing to primary thoughts. Muslims contributed to these root developments and compiled them to one trunk, the Europeans branched out, specialising in the various subjects.
So you are still stuck on the stupid idea that Europeans couldn't read Latin or Greek, and needed Muslims to translate....

I am intrigued though. Please, give us the chain of thought that leads you to conclude that Europeans, who all learned Latin and Greek in school, needed to learn Arabic as well to read Islamic translations of Latin and Greek texts.


Quote:
Notice also that many of the Muslim scientists were polimaths.
Which is exactly why they failed to master anything. Which is why Islam today is a failure, the world leader in absolutely nothing except causing trouble. The jack of all trades is the master of none.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.

Last edited by Voice of Reason, 19-Jul-2011 at 12:41.
#23  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Voice of Reason Add Voice of Reason to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 6626/7006
(19-Jul-2011 at 13:08)


Quote:
Economy. We made the the economic jump that allowed us to invest time and money to get a headstart on science.
Not really. Europe didn't start generating serious national wealth until the Industrial Revolution, which was effectively science. The science created wealth, it was not wealth creating science.

You could argue that pre- Industrial Revolution it was the wealthy aristocrats, with time and money to burn on getting an education and doing the research, that were doing the science. It is true enough, but the same applies to Islam. They too had there wealthy individuals who could have indulged in scientific research.

So why didn't rich Arabs etc. do science? Maybe because their culture didn't encourage it?


Quote:
That and the stronghold of religion was severely weakened.
Christianity was a major player right into the Mid to Late Victorian times, without any notable conflict with science. The attitude, in simple terms, was that God had put all these scientific wonders on Earth for humans to find, and endowed humans with the intellect to find them.

The conflict didn't get serious until Darwin (who was a practicing Unitarian, and began training to be a Parson) popularised evolution, which directly contradicted the Bible. 'Origins' was published in 1859, and is a convenient marker for the divergence of religion and science.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.
#24  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Voice of Reason Add Voice of Reason to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2725/2825
(20-Jul-2011 at 13:19)


Quote:
Not really. Europe didn't start generating serious national wealth until the Industrial Revolution, which was effectively science. The science created wealth, it was not wealth creating science.

You could argue that pre- Industrial Revolution it was the wealthy aristocrats, with time and money to burn on getting an education and doing the research, that were doing the science. It is true enough, but the same applies to Islam. They too had there wealthy individuals who could have indulged in scientific research.

So why didn't rich Arabs etc. do science? Maybe because their culture didn't encourage it?
I wasn't talking so much about the national wealth as much as the artistrocrats and rich traders and so on. People who had the money and free time to invest into researching science.

I can't really say. I haven't studied muslims cultures from this period but I wouldn't be surprsied if this was the case

Quote:
Christianity was a major player right into the Mid to Late Victorian times, without any notable conflict with science. The attitude, in simple terms, was that God had put all these scientific wonders on Earth for humans to find, and endowed humans with the intellect to find them.

The conflict didn't get serious until Darwin (who was a practicing Unitarian, and began training to be a Parson) popularised evolution, which directly contradicted the Bible. 'Origins' was published in 1859, and is a convenient marker for the divergence of religion and science.
Exactly. It was a major player but not a master. Hell to me it often seemed like the Pope was just a few steps away from being a warlord. It's not just about the church having power it's also about religion having power. I know I don't express myself well here but I am on an internet cafe so I don't really have a lot of tiem to clarify but basically the church had become more about power then religion. I think this encouraged more free thought (and science with it). Now on the other hand if religion ahd stayed hard core about the faith(as I suspect was the case about Islam) I think science might have suffered severely as well. Granted going back to the old roots of Roman and Greek knowledge might not directly contradict the church esepcially the way they tried to phrased it but do you think that a church with teh religious fantaism of well let's say current day extremist would have tolerated this? Hell wasn't there some crazy US politican who covered up naked statues in Washington?

So yeah basically that's what I mean. In Europe we had periodws where it was more about power and politics then hardcore faith which I think saved us( and of course there was this great piece on how the black plague actually encouraged scientici advancment but that's for another day)

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views
#25  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump:

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inactives problem solved. Kawee Utopia Suggestions 6 13-Aug-2004 17:20
Ghetto Kingdom problem solved. kostresa Utopia Discussions 3 16-Sep-2003 15:08
Hey! Over here! I solved my debt problem, now i'm living debt free! Zero Gravity Utopia Discussions 24 31-May-2003 01:13
RE: Lost KD, Problem solved?? ausio2 The Lunatic Asylum 1 25-Jul-2001 10:44
please respond! Utopia problem solved? Po8tick The Lunatic Asylum 3 17-Jul-2001 16:43


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 15:19.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.