"Brad McCormick, Ed.D." wrote:[snip]
Why didn't China "take off"? (Maybe they had too much leisure?)
So here is a "speculative" question, which, with the Bush administration's policies, I lament probably is even less likely to admit of empirical testing now than before November 2000:
Supposing that scientists lived in a social world that was basically peaceful and prosperous (like classical China, as opposed to early-modern Europe...), would our educated stratum calcify into a new Marndarin bureaucracy (ETS in Princeton New Jersey is ready to administer more examinations!)?
Or has the dynamic of scientific method (new discoveries not just answering existing questions, but also raising new questions, in infinitum...) mean that, even if the researchers had the luxury of having sherry every afternoon, they would still passionately seek to extend science and technology?
Has the kind of "change of phase" from life lived in finitude to life devoted to "infinite tasks", which Husserl spoke of, taken place in the world of the sciences, even though -- obviously -- not in the world of the social?
If the answer to the preceding question is affirmative, is there any hope that what is partial may become universal (through an "expansiv"e tendency of its own internal logic), and that the structures of our ocial life shall become increasingly dynamic in persons increasingly striving for self-accountability in their form of social life, as well as in their beliefs about the kinematics of billiard balls, galaxies and electrons?
\brad mccormick
Brad - I don't think this quite gets Needham right. His
question took more the form: given that ancient and medieval
Chinese technology and its implementations are vastly
superior to those of the west, why was there an industrial
revolution in the west and not in the east (& correlatively,
the modern techno-science that was part of the process).
To say that Europe had capitalism and China didn't would be
too close to a tautology for Needham. As I read his answer -
especially in an essay "Science and Society: East and West"
(1964) - the essential matter is intense & repeated social
breakdown in Europe - which has many causes, the formations
of early capitalism among them - whereas Chinese history is
characterized by long periods of social stability only
rarely punctuated by upheaval and social change. Social
dislocations in Europe allow for the emergence of new
activities. new social roles, the scientist-engineer
(pioneered in some ways by the artist-architect-engineers of
the Renaissance) and the capitalist-entrepreneur among them,
and consequently the social activities of modern science,
the premium placed on innovation, etc.
So, interesingly, "too much leisure" in a sense is right. If
everything is ticking right along and society is not
breaking down all around you, one can proceed in a leisurely
way. Stability. Tradition. No crises.
sound right?
Stephen Straker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vancouver, B.C.
--
Let your light so shine before men,
that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------------------- Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
