Can I get an honest answer with no "14/88 woooo muh unkkkle adolf" shit?
Question: In the grand scheme of things, how significant has the contribution to science/inmovation/technology/philosophy been from Europe? Especially in comparison to China
>>329082
Go read needham
>>329082
>Question: In the grand scheme of things, how significant has the contribution to science/inmovation/technology/philosophy been from Europe? Especially in comparison to China
Europe was behind China's contribution until XIX, after the industrial revolution Europe got the advantage
>>329082
Of course there will always be people fantasying about oriental people.
I'm half-oriental before the inevitable >white statement.
The question is far too broad to get coherent answers. Some people will consider some specific thing very important and neglect many others. Some will show bad faith and insist that some piece of Siamese woodcraft surpass anything done in 12th century France or 14th Mexico.
Of course there are the full retards like >>329707 and worse. Jared Diamond considered some irrelevant tribe a superior lifeforms because of their hunting techniques.
>>329736
>Muh sourceless image refutes your argument
Go ahead and try to refute that China wasn't the most important economy and advanced society in the world until the industrial revolution
>>329736
That graph is retarded.
>>329760
European science and mathematics had leapt ahead of china a decent amount of time before the industrial revolution.
What were Chinese physicists and mathematicians doing during the 16th and 17th centuries in comparison to :
Newton
Leibniz
euler
Bernoulli
Pascal
Kepler
>>329767
no it isn't.
You must be retarded for being unable to interpret it and understand why it is quite obviously correct and a fairly modest statement.
>>329760
>>329767
The source is Human Accomplishment by Charles Murray. But as seen in the book, you'd get the same lists and same numbers with other books.
>>329760
>Go ahead and try to refute that China wasn't the most important economy and advanced society in the world until the industrial revolution
An hydraulic society deep down in the "Asiatic mode of production" (thanks Marx for this name) isn't what I envision as the "most advanced society" or "most advanced economy".
>>329767
In what way specifically?
>>329860
Plus it isn't even sourced, you had to tell me where to find the sources in separate posts.
>>329736
>Jared Diamond considered some irrelevant tribe a superior lifeforms because of their hunting techniques.
Nigga what?
>>329082
prior to colonialism every part of the world pretty much worked for itself and generally didn't spread big ideas and philosophies far outside themselves. europe only influenced europe.
then colonialism picked up and european science/inmovation/technology/philosophy only dominates because europe dominated the world
Well Europe includes two civilisations that are among the most brilliant in those fields.
Hellenic civilisation was roughly comparable to China. And the West far surpassed any past or existing civilisation since the Middle Ages.
>>330089
>And the West far surpassed any past or existing civilisation since the Middle Ages.
>>330099
Yes, that's what I just said.
>>330116
Oh totally, that's why Al-Andalus and Islam were the scientific centre of the known world during half of the middle ages, for example.
And before you throw ad-hominems I'm not muslim neither a liberal.
>>330124
Yes, but then the other half of the Middle Ages happened. The West had caught up with the Muslims by the 11th century, and by the 1300s Western science was far ahead of the Muslims (not to mention art and engineering which got there even sooner).
>>330136
>and by the 1300s Western science was far ahead of the Muslims
Depends Muslim or Jewish medicine was far more advanced that Christian, for example. Most of Monarch's meds in Spain and Portugal were jewish or muslim for a reason.
And we are forgetting asia, also, China specially was reallly more developed that the small christian kingdoms started becoming nation-states.
>>330150
All Muslim advances in medicine date from the early Middle Ages, and I doubt they still held any secrets centuries later.
In mathematics and physics, Gothic thinkers were inventing calculus and discovering the laws of motion. Meanwhile engineers had been building Gothic cathedrals since the 12th century. Nothing the Muslims or the Chinese ever made can compare to that. And all Chinese inventions were many centuries old by then and had made it to Europe, new inventions such as spectacles or the mechanical clock all came from the West.
>>330150
Nobody denies that there were fine medecine in southern countries. That doesn't mean much though. Medecine was notoriously bad in Europe up to a late date. In many subfields, northern Amerindian physicians were better, and we met them in the 17th century.
> Muslim or Jewish medicine was far more advanced that Christian
This mixes many things that have nothing in common. Actually many of the best physicians in he "islamic world" were Christians and they were renowned for this.
>small christian kingdoms started becoming nation-states.
"Small kingdoms" is not an insult except if you have a fetish for big borders in Paradox games. It also as nothing to do with nation-states which became a thing with the French Revolution at the earliest and actually in 1848.
That wasn't a time of grandiose thinking and creation anyway anywhere in the world.
As for the "islam was the center", when Calif Mutawakkil wanted to expand and codify the grand library in 856, 230 years after Muhammad, he couldn't find a muslim scholar up to the task of mastering so many fields and had to entrust it to Hunayn ibn Ishaq after a time, in spite of going full Jihad otherwise and hating Christians and Jews even more.
