Comments on: Needling Needham

By: East-West Station » A Short History of Nearly Everything

East-West Station » A Short History of Nearly Everything — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:41:21 +0000

[...] about China, it’s the omissions that are more serious, I think. As the recent piece over at Frog in a Well shows all too well, China contributed a lot to scientific understanding over the years, and [...]

By: Asian History Carnival #20 1/2 | Jottings from the Granite Studio

Asian History Carnival #20 1/2 | Jottings from the Granite Studio — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 03:28:02 +0000

[...] so this carnival begins by linking to Frog in a Well where Professor Jonathan Dresner blogs on author Simon Winchester’s latest book which looks at the questions historian Joseph Needham [...]

By: Made in China: De kinesiske opfindelser | KINABLOG.dk

Made in China: De kinesiske opfindelser | KINABLOG.dk — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 16:40:05 +0000

[...] er udkommet i USA og som rammer Storbritannien til september. Den får en grundig behandling her på Frog in a Wall og en mindre pæn anmeldelse på China Beat. Christian Science Monitor synes derimod godt [...]

By: Francois Ouellette

Francois Ouellette — Wed, 28 May 2008 13:28:37 +0000

I’m currently reading Terence Kealey’s book “Sex, Science, and Profit”, in which he argues essentially that free markets are the real source of technological innovations, as opposed to the Baconian model of “academic science -> technology -> progress”. He takes a look at China and argues that most of the technological progress took place during periods of weak central government, when entrepreneurship could flourish, without heavy regulations and tax burdens. Kealey’s analysis is, unfortunately, quite superficial, but would probably deserve a more detailed examination by real historians or economists. But it’s a refreshing view of how science and innovations really happened, and what is the real contribution of government-funded science (which Kealey argues is minimal).

In truth, the West’s success was not due to its pure science, but to technological innovations that were most often made by poorly educated, but brilliant tradesmen. The science followed the technology, and not the opposite. Much the same can be said of China. It didn’t have a “scientific revolution”, but who cares? It was much more advanced technologically, and much more prosperous than the Western world for centuries.

By: Jonathan Dresner

Jonathan Dresner — Wed, 21 May 2008 19:36:36 +0000

It’s excellent, actually. Says most of what I wanted to say much more elegantly and thoroughly.

I’m struck by the way he almost, but not quite, credits the Protestant Reformation with creating the unorthodox space for European scientific culture to evolve. Certainly the shift to Northern Europe and Huguenot-tolerant France suggests something like that.

By: Alan Baumler

Alan Baumler — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:30:51 +0000

Nathan Sivan’s old piece on this is still worth looking at

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~nsivin/scirev.html