Text 1267, 203 rader
Skriven 2004-11-08 13:10:50 av Adam Flinton (1:379/45)
Kommentar till en text av Gary Wiltshire (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Article on WIPO & the public good
=============================================
From: Adam Flinton <adam_NO_@_SPAM_softfab.com>
Gary Wiltshire wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:50:36 +0100, Adam Flinton
> <adam_NO_@_SPAM_softfab.com> wrote:
>
>> By the time the public had got used to Concorde, the prodction line
>> was closed & it would have been un-economic (outside of a mil
>> context) to re-open the line.
>
>
> It's not a one-time thing, Adam. If there were a demand for SSTs new
> productions lines would be set up.
>
There would have to be a much larger demand than for any other thype of
airliner as SST'es are much much harder to build than a subsonic.
>>>> So when in your view did "science" start?
>>>
>>> "Science" as the word is understood by those who know what
>>> "scientific method" means starts at about Bacon's time - Francis,
>>> not Roger.
>>>
>>
>> & Bacon was trying to improve upon chinese tech i.e. gunpowder.
>
>
> His impact was hardly limited to gunpowder.
>
Indeed.
http://courses.nus.edu.sg/course/phibalas/dialogue2001/Scientific%20Method/Baco
n/Bacon%20and%20Dialogue.htm
"BACON ON THE ROLE OF GUNPOWDER, PRINTING AND THE COMPASS
Again, it is well to observe the force and virtue and consequences of
discoveries, and these are to be seen nowhere more conspicuously than in those
three which were unknown to the ancients, and of which the origin, though
recent, is obscure and inglorious; namely, printing, gunpowder, and the
magnet. For these three have changed the whole face and state of things
throughout the world; the first in literature, the second in warfare, the third
in navigation; whence have followed innumerable changes, insomuch that no
empire, no sect, no star seems to have exerted greater power and influence in
human affairs than these mechanical discoveries. [Francis Bacon, "The New
Organon and Related Writings", Library of Liberal Arts, 97 (New York: Liberal
Arts Press, 1960), p. 118.]
Today the origins of Bacon's three inventions are a great deal less obscure.
None of the three was in fact a European discovery but were made in China and
transmitted to Europe through the Mongolian empire. Joseph Needham, "The Grand
Titration: Science and Society in East and West" (Toronto: University of
Toronto Press, 1969), pp. 62-76, discusses some of the implications of this
passage for the multicultural sources of modern science. For a discussion of
this transmission see Nathan Sivin's article "Science and Medicine in China's
Past." in which he argues that the above passage is Francis Bacon's influential
attempt, shortly after 1600, to explain that great efflorescence of human
knowledge and activity that we now call the Renaissance. "
>> That is not true. The underlying framework was there if fallacious &
>> involved earth elements, fire elements, water elements etc.
>
>
> Yes it is true. I don't think you have a firm grasp on the concept of
> scientific method.
>
I do however I think you are looking at science from the POV of a 20/21st
century person & are thus blinkered by what you know now vs what was known
then.
>> Maybe a century ago. in the 1800'es the power was still there & was
>> still very much a real factor.
>
>
> Not significant compared to centuries past.
>
Yes just as significant. China was far & away the greatest economy in that
period & was still making all sorts of discoveries which were then transmitted
back to Europe. In fact the problem the European traders had was finding
anything the Chinese actually wanted.
>> Malaysia, Pakistan. Most muslim countries were however colonised
>> until at least the 1940'es & some (e.g. the FSU muslim countries)
>> until the 1990'es.
>
>
> Show me the big scientific advances from those countries.
>
If you're wondering about Arab-Islamic advances then consider that algorithm is
named after Al-Khorezmi, Chemistry via Alchemical (again from the Arabic),
ditto algebra etc.etc.
Re philosophy then look up Averroes et al.
In terms of "things" then the telescope, the mariners compass, the pendulum,
the watch, the astrolabe, soap.
WRT medecine, then have a look yourself. You might be surprised.
WRT maths, then again have a look. Trigonometry, tangents etc.etc.
>> China is not the third world. It may be part of it, but then show me
>> the great scientific progress which has come out of Luxembourg which
>> is part of the West.
>
>
> I don't know that there isn't, but it it merely part of the west and
> participates. Show me the great advances from Arkansas.
>
Indeed.
>> If you wish to compare East to west then you could compare Japan to
>> the US as well as China to the US.
>
>
> Wrong. As I've already stated, Japan has long since become part of
> that global western-based culture.
>
Really. Very convenient. The Japanese have simply appropriated the bits of
western thought which are usefull to them, much as we did with eastern thought
& indeed as civilizations have done thoughout history.
>> By the time the Eastern Empire was alone, the "Western Culture"
>> consisted of disaparate cultures such as the Anglo-saxon, franks,
>> goths etc where the only common factor was possibly the Church of Rome.
>
>
> They were still part of a larger culture. Your own EU is a similar
> example of super- and sub-cultures.
>
Hohum. The Eastern Empire was much more in touch with the east (esp Persia but
also the Arabs & the Indians). Lots & lots of differences which steadily
accentuated as the centuries rolled by until the final fall at the hands of the
Turks. Even now there is still the debate as to wether Turkey is "Western" or
"Eastern".
>> Yes it is. You have to remember that there are 2 waves of Indian
>> words entering english english, the colonial period & the post war
>> period where for instance the majority population of Bradford is
>> South Asian & ditto Leicester, large parts of London etc & as such we
>> have lots of Indian subcontinental words in very common useage.
>
>
> No, it's not. Again a vocabulary measured in hundreds of thousands of
> words, the contribution is negligible. I know what I'm talking about
> on this one, Adam.
>
Blimey, there's a first.
>> Certainly to bring back things "new to science" whether the potato,
>> tobacco, indian corn etc.
>
>
> Hardly examples of tech transfer to the west.
>
See above re the compass, gunpowder, chemistry, mathematics etc. By that
measure the American impact has been tiny too as there are only a few American
original inventions & things "new to science".
>> I suspect you have limited knowledge of the greeks & for instance
>> their systematic development & integration of knowledge, for example
>> geometry.
>
>
> There is no doubt that they were advanced and that that fed into the
> future western culture of which THEY were already a part, but the tech
> base of Greece and Rome was relatively static for centuries.
>
THEY included lots of Arab & Persian & Indian & Chinese thought. Are you saying
that Persian & Indian & Arab & Chinese thought is thus also part of Western
Culture?
>> http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/toc.html
>
>
> I went to school too, Adam.
>
Then maybe you should have listened while you were there.
Adam
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|