RobinHanson comments on On the Power of Intelligence and Rationality - Less Wrong

13 Post author: alyssavance 23 December 2009 10:49AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (187)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: RobinHanson 23 December 2009 07:51:56PM 4 points [-]

one of the key ingredients in the birth of the modern era was the discovery of science, and its counterpart, the discovery of the art of Traditional Rationality. Armed with these, the nations of Western Europe managed to dominate the entire rest of the world,

You'll actually find it pretty hard to find evidence to support this view, unless you interpret "science" so broadly as to make the claim uninteresting.

Comment author: Tyrrell_McAllister 23 December 2009 08:09:47PM *  2 points [-]

What part of the view is hard to establish? Is it (1) that Western Europe dominated the rest of the world, or (2) that Western Europe needed science and traditional rationality to effect this dominance?

Comment author: RobinHanson 23 December 2009 09:12:55PM 3 points [-]

(2), that "science" was responsible for Western dominance.

Comment author: Tyrrell_McAllister 23 December 2009 09:24:13PM *  4 points [-]

Thanks. A followup: Is it hard to establish (1) that technology is responsible for Western dominance, or (2) that science is responsible for technology?

Comment author: billswift 24 December 2009 01:11:28AM 8 points [-]

Science has mostly trailed technology until very recently. Thermodynamics, for example, developed largely from observing and explaining the already invented and fairly highly developed steam engines. Once the theory was developed it helped suggest improvements, but its original development relied on the already existing technology. Many other examples exist, partly I think because technologies are easier to see clear relationships in and explanations for, than the messy, complicated real world.

Comment author: RobinHanson 24 December 2009 02:06:43PM 0 points [-]

tech was necessary, but to call it "responsible" is to think of it as a more autonomous process than it is. And Bill is right, science has usually gained more from tech than vice versa.

Comment author: MichaelVassar 24 December 2009 03:29:57PM 3 points [-]

I strongly agree that science gained much (more?) from tech, but disagree about tech being "autonomous". Islam and China had more impressive tech in 1200 than Europe had in 1650 but Europe in 1650 had spectacularly more impressive science, and oddly, art. In 1650 though, Europe was still generally a minor global player while a century later they were far the dominant player and in 1850 their dominance was utterly unprecedented.