[一]為什么中國在發(fā)明火藥、印刷術(shù)、造紙術(shù)、指南針和遠(yuǎn)洋航行船后,沒有比西方更早成為世界超級大國?
Why didn''''t China become a world superpower when it first invented gunpowder, printing, paper, the compass, and great ocean sailing ships, before the West did?譯文簡介
網(wǎng)友:宗教區(qū)分了神秘主義和哲學(xué);發(fā)現(xiàn)數(shù)學(xué)、哲學(xué)和工程之間的聯(lián)系;科學(xué)方法的發(fā)現(xiàn);在工程上應(yīng)用科學(xué)和數(shù)學(xué);發(fā)展一種哲學(xué),使資本主義得以發(fā)展,而不是讓經(jīng)濟(jì)停留在市場經(jīng)濟(jì)的狀態(tài);發(fā)展以民法典、普通法或習(xí)慣法為基礎(chǔ)的司法理論和法理學(xué),發(fā)展法治原則......
正文翻譯
Why didn't China become a world superpower when it first invented gunpowder, printing, paper, the compass, and great ocean sailing ships, before the West did?
為什么中國在發(fā)明火藥、印刷術(shù)、造紙術(shù)、指南針和遠(yuǎn)洋航行船后,沒有比西方更早成為世界超級大國?
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 3 )
收藏
Because China lacked the Required Secondary Powers.
The required secondary powers in this case were
religion which distinguishes between mysticism and philosophy
discovering the connection between mathematics, philosophy and engineering
discovery of the scientific method
applying sciences and mathematics on engineering
developing a philosophy which enables capitalism to evolve instead of economy remaining as bazaar economy
developing a judicial theory and jurisprudence based either on civil code, common law or customary law and developing the principle of the rule of law
China never made the distinction between mysticism and philosophy. There never were Chinese Empidocles, Parmenides, Thales, Aristoteles, Platon, Socrates or Democritos.
因為中國欠缺必要的次級力量。在這種情況下必要的次級力量是:
宗教區(qū)分了神秘主義和哲學(xué);
發(fā)現(xiàn)數(shù)學(xué)、哲學(xué)和工程之間的聯(lián)系;
科學(xué)方法的發(fā)現(xiàn);
在工程上應(yīng)用科學(xué)和數(shù)學(xué);
發(fā)展一種哲學(xué),使資本主義得以發(fā)展,而不是讓經(jīng)濟(jì)停留在市場經(jīng)濟(jì)的狀態(tài);
發(fā)展以民法典、普通法或習(xí)慣法為基礎(chǔ)的司法理論和法理學(xué),發(fā)展法治原則。
中國從來沒有把神秘主義和哲學(xué)區(qū)分開來。從來沒有中國的恩培多克勒(古希臘哲學(xué)家), 巴門尼德(前蘇格拉底時期哲學(xué)家), 泰利斯(希臘哲學(xué)家), 亞里士多德, 柏拉圖, 蘇格拉底(古希臘哲學(xué)家)或德謨克利特(古希臘哲學(xué)家)。
Without those powers you really do not develop the scientific method either, which means engineering does not become a science - it will remain as an art and tinkering based on trial and error.
Sciences and mathematics can also be applied on economy, and China never developed Capitalism. The Chinese economy was more developed than that in Arabic countries or Russia, but they never developed the true Capitalism.
China has never had a similar tradition of law, jurisprudence and judicial science as the Romans did. There never was Chinese Lex XII Tabulae nor Corpus Iuris Civilis in China. Which meant there never was the rule of law and clear system of justice, but the Emperors were more or less despots and their whim was the law. This is an especially crucial situation with contracts, individual judicial safety and safety of property and ownership.
The technological weaknesses were that China did not have glass, mechanical clocks, phonetic scxt and corning of the gunpowder.
因此,也沒有像阿基米德、阿波羅尼奧斯、赫倫或丟凡托斯這樣的自然哲學(xué)家,他們會用數(shù)學(xué)來解決哲學(xué)問題和證明概念——比如地球是一個球。中國人直到17世紀(jì)才相信地球是圓的。
如果沒有這些能力,你也無法真正發(fā)展出科學(xué)的方法,這意味著工程學(xué)不會成為一門科學(xué)——它仍將是一門藝術(shù),是建立在反復(fù)試驗的基礎(chǔ)上進(jìn)行修補。
科學(xué)和數(shù)學(xué)也可以應(yīng)用在經(jīng)濟(jì)上,中國從來沒有發(fā)展過資本主義。中國經(jīng)濟(jì)曾比阿拉伯國家或俄羅斯更發(fā)達(dá),但他們從未發(fā)展出真正的資本主義。
中國在法律傳統(tǒng)、法律體系和司法科學(xué)方面從來沒有羅馬人那樣的傳統(tǒng)。中國從來沒有中國版的《十二銅表法》,也沒有中國版的《羅馬法/民法大全》。
(十二銅表法,又稱十二表法,是古羅馬在約前450年制定的法律,因為刻在12塊銅牌(也有說為著色的木牌)上,故而得名。十二銅表法被認(rèn)為是現(xiàn)今“成文法”的始祖,也是歐陸法系中的“羅馬法”的源頭之一。)
中國在技術(shù)上的弱點是,沒有玻璃、機械鐘、音標(biāo)和火藥的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展。
Lack of mechanical clocks meant there was no way of determining time accurately and independently of gravity. It meant also that bluewater navigation was next to impossible. The Chinese had marvellous ships, but they were bound to littoral navigation as the Chinese did not a) understand Earth is a sphere and b) had no instrumentation nor concepts for oceanic navigation.
The Chinese had compass, but they used it on religious rituals and feng shui rather than geographic exploration and navigation at sea. They never understood the connection between trigonometry, time and navigation and they never divided the compass rose on 360 degrees.
The Chinese had magnificient large ships, but they were not ocean-going. The Chinese did not understand Earth is a ball - and never developed celestial navigation. Going to the ocean without bluewater navigation skills is tantamount to suicide. Zheng He made his voyages by littoral, not oceanic, navigation.
沒有玻璃意味著沒有像樣的窗戶,沒有像樣的玻璃器皿,沒有鏡片,沒有化學(xué)儀器和容器,沒有科學(xué)儀器。這對科學(xué)來說是一個無法克服的障礙。
沒有機械時鐘意味著沒有辦法獨立于重力精確地確定時間。這也意味著在藍(lán)海航行幾乎是不可能的。中國人有了不起的船只,但他們注定只能進(jìn)行沿海航行,因為中國人不知道 a)地球是一個球體;b)沒有海洋航行的儀器和概念。
中國人有指南針,但他們把它用于宗教儀式和風(fēng)水,而不是地理探索和海上航行。他們從來都不明白三角學(xué)、時間和航海之間的聯(lián)系,他們也從來沒把360度和羅盤區(qū)分開。
中國人有宏偉的大船,但他們不是遠(yuǎn)洋的。中國人不知道地球是一個球,也從未發(fā)展過天體導(dǎo)航。沒有航海技能就去海洋就等于自殺。鄭和的航行是沿海航行,而不是遠(yuǎn)洋航行。
The Chinese had gunpowder, but corning of the gunpowder is a German 14th century innovation. Without corning the gunpowder, it becomes merely a poof powder, and much more a psychological weapon and an incendiary rather than a projectile propellant or explosive. Corning of the gunpowder improves its efficiency eightfold and enables building decent bombards, cannons and arquebuses.
There was also a grand paradigmatic difference in philosophy between the European and the Chinese thinkers. In China, the thoughts of Meng Zi, Kong Fuzi and Lao Zi prevailed, and the goal of Kong Fuzi was to seek harmony and balance, i.e. don’t rock the boat. In the Chinese tradition, dissidence is poorly tolerated, which leads into a stable society, but it also leads into a societal ossification and also leads easily in the “not invented here” mindset
中國人有紙和印刷機,還有4萬個漢字。雖然它們很漂亮,而且僅憑一瞥就能承載大量信息,但它們基本上是象形文字,難以辨認(rèn),除非你知道它們是如何發(fā)音的,它們的意思是什么。在普遍識字和計算機出現(xiàn)之前,印刷機幾乎是無用的——它花了太多的時間來塑造漢字并印刷,而且識字并不普遍。如果中國采用了蒙古文、日本片假名、平假名等注音文字或韓文,印刷術(shù)將不再只是記錄經(jīng)典,而是成為傳播信息和新思想的有力工具。
中國人有火藥,但火藥的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展是德國14世紀(jì)的發(fā)明。沒有了火藥的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展,它只是一種粉末,更像是一種心理武器和燃燒彈,而不是拋射推進(jìn)劑或炸藥。
在這種情況下,歐洲人傾向于更加外向。據(jù)說,直到今天,歐洲人還沒有就最好的社會模式達(dá)成一致。歐洲人繼承了希臘-猶太-羅馬的傳統(tǒng),在廣場上,在大學(xué)里,在學(xué)校里進(jìn)行大辯論和公開辯論,反對和挑戰(zhàn)現(xiàn)狀。
有一個諷刺——三個猶太人,四個觀點,塔木德法典的注釋本是這場辯論的一個特點。歐洲人意識到他們并不孤單,而且對世界其他地方也更加開放。他們知道自己并不優(yōu)越,而且他們經(jīng)常受到攻擊——北方是海上的野蠻人,東方是游牧民族,南方是伊斯蘭教——而西方是一片廣闊的海洋。為了不被擊垮,他們愿意向外國人學(xué)習(xí),并將他們的思想和創(chuàng)新進(jìn)一步發(fā)揚光大,比如火藥的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展和15世紀(jì)就已經(jīng)知道的后裝彈大炮。
Both mainland China under Com...ism and Taiwan under People’s Three Principles are hallmarks on how an ossified and dormant civilization wakes up, renews itself, absorbs knowledge and education - and take the place which really belongs to them.
說到辛亥革命,它真把沉睡的龍?zhí)咝蚜?。中國人不愚蠢。無論哪個中國——中國大陸還是中國臺灣——都快速進(jìn)行過自我分析,分析了哪里出了問題,并迅速吸收了西方的知識、科學(xué)和思維模式,獲得了所需的次要力量。
無論是共產(chǎn)主義統(tǒng)治下的中國大陸,還是人民三民主義統(tǒng)治下的臺灣,都標(biāo)志著一個僵化和休眠的文明的覺醒、自我更新、吸收知識和教育,并占據(jù)真正屬于他們的位置。
Do you think the absence of regional rivals played a part? While you make excellent points, I am more of a school of thought that China’s dynastic cycle and lack of consistent regional rivals led to technological and institutional stagnation.
你是否認(rèn)為地區(qū)競爭對手的欠缺起到了一定作用?
雖然你的觀點很好,但我更傾向于認(rèn)為,中國的王朝周期和缺乏持續(xù)的地區(qū)競爭對手,導(dǎo)致了技術(shù)和制度上的停滯。
Yes, and it is basic cultural evolution. The lack of rivals - both external and internal - tend to ossify the society and lull it into a state of complacent stagnation.
It is the same in biological evolution - species who have lived in isolation are helpless against invasive species.
是的,這是文化進(jìn)化的基本。缺乏外部和內(nèi)部競爭對手,往往會使社會僵化,陷入自滿的停滯狀態(tài)。
在生物進(jìn)化中也是如此——在孤立環(huán)境中生活的物種對入侵物種是無能為力的。
I agree here, Europeans had to either adapt and improve, or be beaten by those who did.
在這一點上我同意,歐洲人必須要么適應(yīng)和改進(jìn),要么被那些做到了的人打敗。
I disagree with your first two bullets while agreeing with the rest.
The observation isn’t uniquely true to China. Rather, it was Europe that blew away the competition when it entered the Age of Enlightenment.
The bulk of the Classical Chinese philosophies came about the same period as the Greeks’ in the 6th - 3rd century BC. The cross comparison between the two are roughly equivalent. For each of the names you mentioned above, there was a similar Classical Chinese philosopher to match. There had been exhaustive academic papers on this subject. However, it is worthy to point out that there was no equivalent to λογικ? in ancient China. Logic, was introduced to the Chinese scholars by the Jesuits in the 16th century AD.
我不同意你的前兩個觀點,但我同意其余部分。
并非只有中國才如此。相反,是歐洲在進(jìn)入啟蒙時代時才擊敗了競爭對手。
中國古典哲學(xué)的大部分產(chǎn)生于公元前6 - 3世紀(jì),與希臘相當(dāng),兩者之間的交叉比較大致相當(dāng)。對于你上面提到的每一個名字,都有一個相似的中國古典哲學(xué)家來匹配。關(guān)于這個問題已有詳盡的學(xué)術(shù)論文。然而,值得指出的是,在中國古代并沒有什么“λογικ b”。邏輯學(xué),是在公元16世紀(jì)由耶穌會士引入給中國學(xué)者的。
Innovations in mathematics and engineering were sporadic, not systemic in ancient China, like everywhere else in the world. If it wasn’t the Renaissance, the Classical Greek philosophies would have been buried away in the European history.
Thus, the real question was why the Age of Enlightenment only happened in Europe, but not in Mesopotamia, Nile Delta, Indus Valley, Yellow River Valley, or Mesoamerica.
為了反駁你的一些概括——例如,祖沖之,他在公元5世紀(jì)將圓周率的值近似到小數(shù)點后7位,領(lǐng)先競爭對手800年。在公元7世紀(jì)的唐朝,地球被證明是彎曲的,并有假說認(rèn)為地球可能是一個球。
和世界上其他地方一樣,中國古代在數(shù)學(xué)和工程方面的創(chuàng)新是零星的,不是系統(tǒng)性的。如果不是文藝復(fù)興時期,古典希臘哲學(xué)早就湮沒在歐洲歷史中了。
因此,真正的問題是,為什么啟蒙時代只發(fā)生在歐洲,而不是在美索不達(dá)米亞、尼羅河三角洲、印度河流域、黃河流域或中美洲。
Thus, the real question was why the Age of Enlightenment only happened in Europe,
Perhaps it is because Christian monotheistic theology allowed Europeans to develop a mechanistic and progressive outlook on the world - without falling into the trap of Islamic occasionalism:
Christianity and the rise of western science
Do Chinese of the previous ages believe in linear (progressive) development of the universe or cyclical one -like Hindus? Do they have some sort of supreme deity, which allows the world to work as a designed mechanism, governed by universal laws?
“因此,真正的問題是,為什么啟蒙時代只發(fā)生在歐洲,而不是在美索不達(dá)米亞、尼羅河三角洲、印度河流域、黃河流域或中美洲。”
也許是因為基督教一神論神學(xué)允許歐洲人發(fā)展出一種機械的、進(jìn)步的世界觀,而沒有落入伊斯蘭偶發(fā)主義的陷阱:鏈接——《基督教和西方科學(xué)的興起》
以前的中國人是相信普世的線性(漸進(jìn))發(fā)展還是像印度人相信的循環(huán)發(fā)展? 他們是否有某種至高無上的神,允許世界作為一個設(shè)計好的機制運作,受普遍法則支配?
Christianity as a probable cause is one of the theories. Yet, you cannot exclude exceptions such as the Islamic Golden Age where ideas such as scientific method and algebra were first born. Or, at least we should agree that the Renaissance is not unique across the civilizations of the world. But the Age of Enlightenment certainly is.
I personally lean towards the theory that the unique combination of geography, politics and the Catholic Church (not Christianity the religion) played a larger role. A very long coastline, a highly fragmented feudal system and a common Christian identity, together, gave birth to a “healthy competition”.
基督教可能是原因之一。但是,也不能排除伊斯蘭黃金時代的科學(xué)方法、代數(shù)等概念的誕生?;蛘?,至少我們應(yīng)該同意,文藝復(fù)興并不是世界文明中的獨特現(xiàn)象。不過啟蒙時代確實獨特。
我個人傾向于這樣一種理論,即地理、政治和天主教會(而非基督教)的獨特結(jié)合發(fā)揮了更大的作用。漫長的海岸線,高度分散的封建體系和共同的基督教身份,共同孕育了“健康的競爭”。
In a “healthy competition” between the states, states compete in both soft and hard power where arts and literature could blossom. In a “bad competition” when states could conquer each other, they focus on hard power.
The Greek City States were in a healthy competition before the Peloponnesian War. The Spring Autumn Period in China was a healthy competition.
在“健康的競爭”中:
1.許多不同規(guī)模的玩家;
2.在任何層面都有超過2名玩家;
3.很難將其中一名玩家驅(qū)逐出去;
4. 如果一名玩家被逐出了競爭,那么應(yīng)該在不破壞整體動態(tài)的情況下出現(xiàn)一個替換者;
5. 防止游戲發(fā)生內(nèi)爆的外部威脅(如奧斯曼帝國)。
在國與國之間的“健康競爭”中,國之間在軟實力和硬實力上競爭,藝術(shù)和文學(xué)可以蓬勃發(fā)展。在一場“惡性競爭”中,當(dāng)各國可以相互征服時,它們會專注于硬實力。
在伯羅奔尼撒戰(zhàn)爭之前,希臘城邦之間的競爭很激烈。中國的春秋時期也是一個健康的競爭時期。
The problem with Islam was that its fundamental core tenets never recognized the difference between philosophy and theology, physics and metaphysics. One of the core tenets of Islam is Occassionalism, which denies the law of causality.
You cannot evolve the scientific method if you deny the law of causality. It will stultify the cultural evolution.
Paradoxally Indian civilization, with Hinduism and Buddhism, and the concept of karma, came very close to this breakthrough.
Likewise, Capitalism could never have evolved in the Islamic sphere, and the reason is simple. Islam condones slavery, and slavery creates a horribly divided society into filthy rich, dirt poor and the slaves - there is no middle class, and no free labour, which are the fundamental pre-requisites for Capitalism. Likewise, if the only laws are Sharia and ruler’s whim, there is no judicial safety and no security of ownership and concepts of legal rights. The Islamic economy was doomed to remain as a bazaar economy and not evolve any further.
伊斯蘭教的問題在于,它的基本核心教義從未承認(rèn)哲學(xué)與神學(xué)、物理學(xué)與形而上學(xué)之間的區(qū)別。伊斯蘭教的核心教義之一是“偶然主義”,它否認(rèn)因果律。
如果你否認(rèn)因果律,你就不能發(fā)展科學(xué)的方法。它會阻礙文化的發(fā)展。
自相矛盾的是,印度文明,包括印度教和佛教,以及因果報應(yīng)的概念,非常接近這一突破。
同樣,資本主義也不可能在伊斯蘭世界發(fā)展,原因很簡單。伊斯蘭教縱容奴隸制,而奴隸制造成了一個可怕的社會分裂,其中包括骯臟的富人、骯臟的窮人和奴隸。沒有中產(chǎn)階級,沒有自由勞動力,而這正是資本主義的基本前提。同樣,如果唯一的法律是伊斯蘭教法和統(tǒng)治者的一時性起,就沒有司法安全,也沒有所有權(quán)和法律權(quán)利概念的保障。伊斯蘭經(jīng)濟(jì)注定要繼續(xù)作為一種市場經(jīng)濟(jì)而不再進(jìn)一步發(fā)展。
Healthy competition is the thing which powers the cultural evolution. The Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) faced too hard competition and it was in a defensive war at all its fronts throughout the history. While it had all the pre-requisites for the rise to the next evolutionary level, all its resources went into warfare. There is a reason why the Byzantine armies have always been the wargamers’ all-time favourites, but the same reason also stultified the cultural evolution there in the 12th century.
Likewise, too little competition will coagulate any those processes which run the cultural evolution, and likewise stultify the cultural evolution. If the surrounding world is also less evolved, a blissful complacency is almost guaranteed.
But let us suppose Mongolia, Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia had been stronger and culturally more evolved than they historically were during the era of Spring and Autumn, and the Warring States. Would it have also meant that the state of healthy competition would have prevailed?
當(dāng)然,穆斯林?jǐn)?shù)學(xué)家發(fā)展了代數(shù)。但他們從未發(fā)現(xiàn)哲學(xué)和數(shù)學(xué),科學(xué)和數(shù)學(xué),工程和數(shù)學(xué)之間的聯(lián)系。它們?nèi)匀皇欠珠_的領(lǐng)域。這也是科學(xué)方法的先決條件之一。
健康的競爭是文化進(jìn)化的動力。東羅馬帝國(拜占庭帝國)面臨著過于激烈的競爭,歷史上一直處于防御戰(zhàn)爭中。雖然它擁有上升到下一個進(jìn)化階段的所有先決條件,但它的所有資源都投入了戰(zhàn)爭。拜占庭軍隊一直是戰(zhàn)爭玩家的最愛,這是有原因的,但同樣的原因也阻礙了12世紀(jì)的文化演變。
同樣地,過少的競爭將凝固任何那些運行文化進(jìn)化的過程,同樣使文化進(jìn)化變得遲鈍。如果周圍的世界也沒有那么發(fā)達(dá),那么幾乎可以肯定會陷入一種自滿情緒。但是,讓我們假設(shè)蒙古、朝鮮、日本、越南、印度尼西亞和馬來西亞在春秋和戰(zhàn)國時期比歷史上更強大,文化也更發(fā)達(dá)。這是否也意味著健康競爭的狀態(tài)會占上風(fēng)?
I was raised a Roman Catholic. However, over the years, I came to the realization that the core theologies of different faiths in the world, after millenniums of evolution, do not differ fundamentally. It is their earthly institutions that at different times, drew the physical separations between the people, i.e. it was not the thoughts, but the subsequent interpretations motivated by politics that divided us.
Hence, I wouldn’t claim that Islam, the faith, is prohibitive to innovations and quest for truth. Instead, why would Occasionalism, a doctrine raised three centuries after the birth of the religion was not overturned? What geopolitical forces preserved its relevance? Please also remember that the Occasionalism doctrine coexisted with the Islamic Golden Age for 200 years and didn’t hinder the Golden Age at all. Furthermore, I would argue it was the Mongol invasion that gave rise to a conservative counter resurgence that in turn bolstered Occasionalism. The aftermath of the Mongol invasion decisively turned ancient China inward looking and isolationist.
我從小就是羅馬天主教徒。然而,多年來,我意識到,世界上不同信仰的核心神學(xué),經(jīng)過幾千年的演變,本質(zhì)上并沒有什么不同。是它們的世俗制度在不同的時期,把人們分開,也就是說,不是思想,而是由政治驅(qū)動的后續(xù)解釋,把我們分開。
因此,我不會說伊斯蘭教這種信仰阻礙了創(chuàng)新和對真理的追求。相反,為什么在宗教誕生三個世紀(jì)后興起的偶然主義沒有被推翻? 是什么地緣政治力量保持了它的相關(guān)性?請記住偶然主義與伊斯蘭黃金時代共存了200年,并沒有阻礙黃金時代的發(fā)展。此外,我認(rèn)為是蒙古人的入侵導(dǎo)致了保守勢力的復(fù)興,而這反過來又支持了偶然主義。蒙古入侵的后果使古代中國果斷地轉(zhuǎn)向了內(nèi)向型和孤立主義。
The Roman Catholic Church was not kind when its own interpretation of the universe was challenged. There were Copernicus, Galileo and Bruno. However, the highly fragmented feudal system under the Holy Roman Empire gave rise to the Reformation, and SURVIVED and PROSPERED. This is the “healthy competition” I highlighted in my previous comment.
I do not agree with your argument that “Certainly the Muslim mathematicians developed algebra. But they never found the connection between philosophy and mathematics, science and mathematics and engineering and mathematics. They remained as separate spheres. That is one of the pre-requisites again for the scientific method.” If you study the Islamic Golden Age more carefully, you should see it as a Renaissance of the Near East. The Islamic Golden Age was NOT indigenous, but a free exchange of ideas on the extension of all thoughts in its geographical vicinity. They spent a hundred years translating different scxtures into Syriac and Arabic. They borrowed heavily from Greek and Roman and Persian and Indian philosophers. They clearly understood the connection between philosophy and mathematics and physics and astronomy. Scientific method is often credited to Ibn al-Haytham, and Islamic Golden Age scholar. For that duration of the world history, the Near East was the best environment for scholars and polymaths. In fact, some of their works made to ancient China along the Silk Road.
宗教不是靜止的,它們隨著我們對宇宙的理解而發(fā)展。宗教機構(gòu)不是靜止不動的,當(dāng)面臨挑戰(zhàn)時,它們會進(jìn)化。當(dāng)羅馬天主教會自己對宇宙的解釋受到挑戰(zhàn)時,它并不友善。出現(xiàn)了哥白尼,伽利略和布魯諾。然而,神圣羅馬帝國下高度碎片化的封建制度引發(fā)了宗教改革,并存活下來且繁榮起來。這就是我在前面的評論中強調(diào)的“健康競爭”。
我不同意你的論點——“穆斯林?jǐn)?shù)學(xué)家當(dāng)然發(fā)展了代數(shù)。但他們從未發(fā)現(xiàn)哲學(xué)和數(shù)學(xué),科學(xué)和數(shù)學(xué),工程和數(shù)學(xué)之間的聯(lián)系。它們?nèi)匀皇欠珠_的領(lǐng)域。這也是科學(xué)方法的先決條件之一?!?br /> 如果你更仔細(xì)地研究伊斯蘭的黃金時代,你應(yīng)該把它看作近東的文藝復(fù)興。伊斯蘭的黃金時代不是本土的,而是一個思想的自由交流,在它的地理范圍內(nèi)擴展所有的思想。他們花了一百年的時間把不同的經(jīng)文翻譯成敘利亞語和阿拉伯語。他們大量借鑒了希臘、羅馬、波斯和印度的哲學(xué)家。他們清楚地了解哲學(xué)、數(shù)學(xué)、物理學(xué)和天文學(xué)之間的聯(lián)系??茖W(xué)方法常常被認(rèn)為是伊本·海瑟姆(Ibn al-Haytham)的功勞,他是伊斯蘭黃金時代的學(xué)者。在世界歷史的那段時間里,近東是學(xué)者的最佳環(huán)境。事實上,他們的一些作品是沿著絲綢之路傳到古代中國的。
The question goes back to why innovations stagnated everywhere else besides Europe? Hence, my theory of a “healthy competition”.
I tend to believe that the rise of the Ottomans led to a “bad competition” in the Near East, and later secured “no competition” after they sacked Constantinople and consolidated power in the wider region.
The Autumn and Spring Period was a “healthy competition”, but the Warring State Period was a “bad competition”. An unified ancient China had no peers in its corner of the world, and its nearest equals were ancient India across the Himalayas and ancient Persia across the deserts and mountains.
隨后,意大利的文藝復(fù)興也大量借鑒了伊斯蘭學(xué)者的觀點,知識被分享和傳播開來。問題又回到了為什么除了歐洲,其他地方的創(chuàng)新都停滯不前?因此,我提出了“健康競爭”的理論。
我傾向于認(rèn)為,奧斯曼帝國的崛起導(dǎo)致了近東地區(qū)的“惡性競爭”,后來他們洗劫了君士坦丁堡,并在更廣泛的地區(qū)鞏固了權(quán)力,從而確保了“無競爭”。
春秋時期是“良性競爭”,戰(zhàn)國時期是“惡性競爭”。 一個統(tǒng)一的古代中國在它的角落里沒有對手,與它最接近的是跨越喜馬拉雅山脈的古印度和跨越沙漠和山脈的古波斯。