How do they explain western dominance in other world regions?

[Ned]

GePap, certainly during its time the Roman Republic and later the Empire were the most advanced and powerful civilization the Earth had ever seen. I think there is no doubt that the Roman Empire laid the foundations of modern Western civilization. To the extent that the Roman civilization has become the dominant civilization in the world, that is how Rome dominated.

It is true that of the pillars of modern technology, patents came later. But one cannot dismiss their importance in the rise of Western technology. When the Japanese came to the West in the late 1800s to understand why the West was dominant, they concluded, among other things, that the most important reason for Western technological advancement was their patent systems, particularly those of Germany, England in United States. Today the best patent systems in the world are those of United States, Germany, England and Japan. It is not a mystery why most of the inventions and scientific breakthroughs today come from these countries.

But you are you may argue also that China and other countries also have patents. But the problem is that most other countries do not have reliable legal systems that will enforce patent rights. Thus it is the rule of law in combination with patents that brings the foundation of modern technology.

Here we can see the tie-in between Roman civilization, which founded society on the rule of law, and the dominance of Western civilization.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


By what, word of God? if you get a big enough mob, you can change any law or constitution of the land. You can even define a certain group of people as enemy of the people (or something like that) and put them in concentration camps (or worse).

Good point! That's what Mao did.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by GePap
Its luck and geography-after all, a nice simple storm could have come and Columbus would be caput- or he could have been killed on shore, or any of the endless possible ways his voyage could have ended, as so many forgotten voyages have, destroyed.

And in a sense, the luck OF geography

Would you agree that those who undertake something have a chance to meet luck and bad luck, whereas those who undertake nothing can only meet bad luck. (The exception of having natural resources did not often proves to be an asset).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, I don't follow this cult of geography either. I admit it was important in some aspects, but luck plays a huge role as well.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Sikander


Well Scott Joplin made a fortune off of his ragtime compositions around the turn of the last century, so its at least 50 years older than Rock & Roll.

Actually Stephen Foster made quite a bit of money off of his compositions too. In nineteenth century America the family piano, supplied with store bought sheet music, provided the mass entertainment of that era. Unfortunately he squandered it and died penniless.

[Dr Strangelove]

Maybe the critical question to ask is how did European culture come to evolve the characteristic of fostering innovation and exploration during the Renaissance when for centuries it had very much inhibited both?

[Ned]

Well, it was the Genoese who where there at fall of Constantinople and it was a Genoese who few decades later discovered America with a map he or one of his countrymen took from Constantinople.

Also, as I said, patents began during this time and made the investment in new technology secure.

[Ned]

A little more on the history of patents and their apparent direct link to innovation in Europe:

"These patent laws were enacted at the end of the dark ages just before the Renaissance in Italy and the Industrial Revolution in England, suggesting that they stimulated innovation."

http://www.ipcreators.org/Heckel/ACM_Paper/pathist.htm

[debeest]

Great, a link from the Intellectual Property Creatores.org. That'll be impartial for sure....

Dr. Strangelove's question begs to be answered. If you're going to include Greece and Rome in "Western Civilization," you probably ought to explain the 800 years or so of the Dark Ages, when innovation was anathema to the ruling church. Explain the Inquisition. Explain how Galileo's innovative ideas were fostered by Western civilization. Explain the rejection of Copernicus' ideas. Explain a period when a European who wandered twenty miles from home might not ever find his way home again, because there were no maps, and towns didn't even have names, while advanced civilizations with relatively advanced rule of law provided the opportunity for Asians and Middle Easterners to traipse across continents in pursuit of trade profits. Explain why Marco Polo was so stunned with what he saw when he left home.

How 'bout them Dark Ages, eh?

[VetLegion]

The myth about dark ages being "dark" has been debunked long ago.

Ned, this is the first time I hear patent laws preceded growth of invention acitivity. Can you back it up a little better?

Btw, who'd say it takes 8 pages for a discussion to acquire a reasonable tone?

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by debeest
If you're going to include Greece and Rome in "Western Civilization," you probably ought to explain the 800 years or so of the Dark Ages

Rome and ancient Greece are plainly the base of the Western civilization. Latin was language of choice for educated masses until the reneissance and even after, most of the works copied by monks have been of Greek origin and so on.

when innovation was anathema to the ruling church. Explain the Inquisition. Explain how Galileo's innovative ideas were fostered by Western civilization. Explain the rejection of Copernicus' ideas.

Do you know when Copernicus and Gallileo lived? By the time they appeared, the progress was rolling and could not be stopped.

Innovation being anathema to Church is also a myth.

Explain a period when a European who wandered twenty miles from home might not ever find his way home again, because there were no maps, and towns didn't even have names

What do you think Roman empire was, the rule of law like today?

Ofcourse towns had names, even better, if you were a Christian and knew latin you were home in all of Europe since nation states didn't exist. Hi I am Jacques from Paris and Hi I am John from London, no nations yet...



Anyway, if we take GGS for serous everything was solved by geography a couple thousands of years ago. However even if you discard geographic determinism you can see that even in the "dark ages", Europe was on a path to domination.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by VetLegion

Originally posted by debeest
If you're going to include Greece and Rome in "Western Civilization," you probably ought to explain the 800 years or so of the Dark Ages

Rome and ancient Greece are plainly the base of the Western civilization. Latin was language of choice for educated masses until the reneissance and even after, most of the works copied by monks have been of Greek origin and so on.

Yes, but for a few hundred years the repository of most classical learning was in the Middle East. Baghdad was the centre of world culture for centuries, and it was only with the crusades that many important classical texts like the works of Aristotle were reintroduced to Western Europe.

The idea that Western civilisation was a single thread from the Greeks to us is ridiculous. It's more accurate to see it as different threads cross influencing each other - dying out in some areas and being transferred and reborn elsewhere.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Agathon


Yes, but for a few hundred years the repository of most classical learning was in the Middle East. Baghdad was the centre of world culture for centuries, and it was only with the crusades that many important classical texts like the works of Aristotle were reintroduced to Western Europe.

The idea that Western civilisation was a single thread from the Greeks to us is ridiculous. It's more accurate to see it as different threads cross influencing each other - dying out in some areas and being transferred and reborn elsewhere.

I find it the concept that Constantinople was completely bereft of ancient texts and classical knowledge. I hardly think it had lost all civilization even though it had lost much of its power.

However, as we all know, it was the contact between Constantinople and the West that brought about the Rennaissance, especially after its fall when most of its citizens of note, plus their books, etc., found their way to Italy and the West.

So, even though most of German-dominated Europe had indeed fallen into a dark age, islands of Roman civilization continued to exist, such as at Venice, Rome and Constantinople.

As well, when the Spanish took Cordoba, they found a major library that also had many of the classical texts.

But, just bringing back Roman civilization does not itself explain the tremendous advance in technology that took place in Europe from the late 1400's and on because, as we know, Rome was not known for rapid advances in technology outside of civil engineering. The explanation for the tide of technical advances include a patent system that protected inventions and the printing press that spread technical knowledge.

[LDiCesare]

Ned, the printing press alone cannot be given all the credit. It had, after all, been invented in Korea, not the West. In fact, Korea is a very nice example of geography stifling a country. They invented the printing press and the ironcads centuries before the Europeans or Americans, but they couldn't expand either militarily or culturally because their neighbours were China, which was so much bigger than them that they couldn't be invaded and exerted a big cultural influence towards Korea, and Japan, which is a set of hard to conquer islands.

[Ned]

As I and others have pointed out, technical progress began with the introduction of patents. Whereever they went, so did new inventions. This had never, ever, happend before in the history of man.

The printing press spread knowledge which is also critical to advancement. One of the things a patent does is to write down a description of the invention in exchange for the limited monopoly. Now that had NEVER been done before systematically. Patents created a literature of technology that let other build on prior inventions. The pace of technical advance accelerated and continues to accelerate because of patents, and almost soley because of patents.