Spilling out over the side to anyone who will listen

 

  Sunday, December 1, 2002


Can We Understand Non-Linear History?

According to the New York Times Book Review, in his new book, Lost Discoveries: The Ancient Roots of Modern Science -- From the Babylonians to the Maya, Dick Teresi catalogs a host of discoveries that were actually re-made by Western scientists hundreds and even thousands of years after they were initially made:

This catalog of achievement, while not exactly news, is breathtaking in the sheer sweep of human ingenuity. The Babylonians developed the Pythagorean theorem at least 1,500 years before Pythagoras was born. Indian mathematicians performed multiplication and algebra, and even ventured toward calculus, a millennium before Europeans. An Arab astronomer, Ibn al-Shatir, spelled out the theory of planetary motion 150 years before Copernicus. The "Mercator projection" was used by Chinese cartographers centuries before the birth of Mercator. In the third century B.C., physicists in China pretty neatly summarized Newton's first law of motion.
Centuries before Gutenberg, the Chinese used movable type; by A.D. 868 block printing was so widespread that government authorities issued edicts to curtail the proliferation of printed astrological calendars. In order to play their famous ball games, the Aztecs invented vulcanized rubber centuries before Goodyear, and the Chinese were manufacturing "Bessemer steel" nearly 2,000 years before Sir Henry Bessemer "invented" the process. Francis Bacon once commented on the "obscure and inglorious origins" of the magnetic compass, gunpowder, and paper and printmaking, three inventions that he claimed transformed civilization. "They all came from China," Teresi writes, and were invented centuries before the West became aware of them.

Teresi posits a couple of reasons for the divergence from these facts that is taught in most Western primary and secondary schools. First, there is, of course, cultural pride, and second, many of these discoveries were subsequently lost in any number of ways. A reason he doesn't mention, but which I think is important, is the compulsion to see history as a linear progression rather than as the random, somtimes cyclical evolution that it actually is.


11:48:36 AM     What do you think? ()

Why Would I Want to Talk to My Computer?

Mike Langberg makes "Bold technology predictions for 2012." Aside from their not being especially bold (they all push existing technologies just a bit further), I'm most disappointed to see yet another pundit extol the wonders of computer speech recognition. Speech is the most subtle and ambiguous form of communication--that's what makes it so hard for computers to parse. Most of the trouble that I get myself into when communicating with others stems from speaking. I would much rather communicate with most people via e-mail than over the phone. This is especially true when I'm speaking to someone who's likely to take me literally, as, say, a computer would. And I shudder to think of the erosion of language that would follow a generation raised speaking to machines. What we take to be everyday speech would come to seem poetic by comparison. Just look at what instant messaging is doing to writing.


11:29:19 AM     What do you think? ()

Are You Upstairs or Downstairs?

Last night, we watched the beautiful Gosford Park. One of the not-so-subtle themes was the distinction between upstairs (the lords and ladies) and downstairs (the servants). I felt compelled to dismiss this distinction as an antiquated anachronism. But upon reflection, it occurred to me that I am living in its midst now, though a far more dynamic version of it.

Hundreds of years ago, parts of my family were most certainly upstairs, though we have come down quite a bit since. In my own lifetime, I was born and raised downstairs, but over the last few years have moved upstairs. I now live in a full service building with a staff that comports itself in much the same way as the servants in the movie and that works from offices in the building's basement. And there are shareholders in this building with maids and the like who ensure, among other things, that they need never visit the basement.


11:14:10 AM     What do you think? ()


Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2003 Morgan N. Sandquist.
Last update: 11/2/03; 10:31:34 AM.


 

December 2002
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        
Nov   Jan


Links


Weblog Roll







morgannels.org
WWW

Currently Reading



Subscribe to "Gnosis" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.