1001 Islamic Inventions 1034
pev writes "There's a new traveling exhibition in the UK entitled 1001 inventions. It contains some of the most interesting inventions from the past few thousand years. The common theme, however, is that they all came from the Islamic world and not the west. In some cases [the list is] quite surprising. For the lazy, the Independent newspaper in the UK printed their top 20 from the exhibition."
Computer Science 101 (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yeah yeah yeah (Score:5, Interesting)
Discrimination (Score:1, Interesting)
The irony is that while I find it both interesting and disappointing that society continues to congratulate everyone else for the advances and achievements of their respective genders and races, I find it simultaneously hollow and pointless. How can you be proud of something someone else did, when the only thing(s) you have in common with those people are physical/geographical attributes over which you had no control anyway? How can you be proud of something you had no control over? Am I proud to be "white?" Not at all. It required no effort on my part, thus it can hardly be considered an "accomplishment."
Nevertheless, people will continue to congratulate each other over such arbitrary attributes, while straight white males stand at the sidelines with their mouths shut, lest they be considered racist, sexist, homophobic, or just generally discriminatory.
Lots of innovation (a long time ago) (Score:5, Interesting)
For reasons that I don't understand, the Christian and Muslim worlds seem to have flip-flopped regarding the dominance of religion vs. rational thought somewhere in the past 200-500 years. Of course this is a great over-simplification, but it's worth remembering that there was a time when the Arab world was the center of learning and enlightenment in the non-eastern-Asian world (I phrase it like that b/c I don't want to flamebait the Indians or Chinese).
Re:Shouldn't these be called... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Nothing after 1300 (Score:5, Interesting)
so minor that a german/roman emperor could lease the holy land for a lifetime (and having a clash with the pope over this back then)
The main problem for the downfall of the arabic civilization might be the in islamic wars, which mainly was triggered by the turkish people slowly but surely taking over the islamic empire and in islamic wars between various countries.
The impact on the eastern roman empire was severe however, they sped up its downfall which was more or less unavoidable anyway.
In the end the islamic civilisation basically was fruitful due to knowledge inheritance of the occupied eastern roman empire parts, and being hilghly tolerant to christians and jews in the occupied areas. Culture could only thrive in this tolerant area.
Re:Nothing after 1300 (Score:2, Interesting)
(hint: starts with a J, ends with an "ihad")
Re:Discrimination (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, you did, and even in your latest post, you're still overstating it -- and providing the answer to the question in your original post. The reason that people who aren't straight, white, Christian males feel the need to celebrate the accomplishements of $DEMOGRAPHIC_GROUP is because although straight, white, Christian males have accomplished a hell of a lot, they haven't accomplished as large a proportion of everything as a lot of people (like you) seem to think they have; and those who are not swCm's feel justifiably aggrieved at having their accomplishments downplayed (or, in many cases, having the credit stolen outright.) Really, it's a matter of a pendulum swing; give it some time, and things will settle down. In a perfect world, we'd give everyone credit for their accomplishments without even noting their sexual preference, race, religion, sex, national origin, disability status, age, veteran status, height, weight, hair color, absence or presence of hair, musical tastes, et bloody cetera
Re:Computer Science 101 (Score:3, Interesting)
Many "Islamic scholars" at the "height" (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Those are Arabs, traditionally. (Score:5, Interesting)
What does it mean in the long run? In my opinion, not a whole lot. Other people's opinions may differ from mine.
Here's an example for the curious. [charleston.net]
Re:Discrimination (Score:5, Interesting)
The truth, of course, is that the vast majority of all historical accomplishments were achieved by straight, white, Christian males.
You can't overlook the reasons behind this. Being straight, white, Christian, and male has nothing to do with inventions. The reason for this is that "straight" (I'd question the validity of this), white, Christians were the financial/military leaders over the past 200 years. Do you expect a black man to have been able to invent the ligthbulb from his slave quarters? Do you think a Pagan could have gotten funding from a catholic society to do medical research without being burned at stake? Do you think women had the educational opportunities to go forth in a male dominated society and been accepted as credible scientists? Do you think Leonardo DaVinci could have really come out of the closet?The truth is that African-Americans were enslaved and oppressed, Africans themselves were plagued with civil wars and apartheid, the jews were being eradicated in a hollocaust, the Japanese were getting a-bombed, the middle-east was still being bombarded with countless "cruisaides", women were raped, beaten and sent to the kitchen, and the straight, white, aryan, Christian males were sitting on top of their pile of money with guns drawn reaping all the benefits of being the "master race".
Now I know you're not a bigot, I just think you're disreguarding the fact that you are indeed a majority in every way. You might ask why there's black history classes, but no white history classes... because the "history" that you had in school is white history.
If you wanna be proud of anything, be proud of the fact that you are part of a race, sexuality, gender, and religion that has not been publicly ridiculed, tortured, eradicated, and had their ass kicked six ways from sunday for the past x-hundred years.
And not that I think its relevant, but I'm also a straight, white, Christian male.
Correction on several inaccuracies (Score:5, Interesting)
I note a trend: the Arabs, perhaps because of their geographic location at the crossroads of the East and West, are bound to discover many new and exciting ideas and teaching from their neighbors. They were in pretty good company (Greco-Roman thoughts to the West, Indian thoughts to the East) so they are bound to pick up something.
Why isn't there a mod option for "patronizing"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, the "muslim world" (again, a useless term in this regard, since it's large and heterogenous; take it to mean the "Arab world", which is still too vague) has fallen from where it once was in terms of intellectual prominence. That's unrelated to either the naure of Islam per-se or to the presence of religious fundamentalists.
Also, nobody's gonna attack you or your family because you post on slashdot. You stupid little bedwetting jackass.
Re:Computer Science 101 (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Shouldn't these be called... (Score:3, Interesting)
Do moderators just click at anything that sounds historical?
LS
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It's sad . . . (Score:3, Interesting)
That's what you all said two years ago.
"At least with G.W. Bush you know he'll be gone after 2008."
And then it will be eight years of President Cheney. I feel so much better now.
Re:But... (Score:5, Interesting)
Islam, as its holy tracts, includes (some subset of*) the Hebrew and the Christian testaments. Mohammed added very little, volume-wise, to the corpus. Bugger all, in reality, as it was people 100-200 years after Mohammed who were the creative ones** in their compilation of FoaF-attested Suras.
FP.
[* Likewise, Judaism only accepts a subset of the books into its current version of the official list; and Christianity only accepts a _tiny_ subset - there are several dozen Gospels that have bubbled into and out of popularity over the last 2 millennia, not just 4, for example.]
[** Just like Christianity.]
Re:But... (Score:3, Interesting)
I think that if Jesus had bit a bit more like Muhammad (ie, a millitary and political leader) he might have gotten a better reception when he claimed to be the Messiah.
Re:It's sad . . . (Score:1, Interesting)
Point of the joke is supposed to emphasis the fact that the troubles of NI have *very* little to the tenants of religious faith. They are and pretty much always have been a conflist(espically in the North) between the recent arrival Ulsters and the so called "real" Irish. Its a political and land based dispute that has been going on for approx 400 years(in some ways longer) and has long bitter incidents on both sides that have tradionally fueled the fires... bloody sundy, the easter uprising the omagh bombing etc etc etc etc,
Many are Chinese Inventions (Score:2, Interesting)
Or let's look at the invention of the Zero, which is actually an Indian invention (as in India), and is documented in their ancient texts.
We in the West pay more attention to where we got it from, not from where it originated. Possibly because we are too lazy to actually do the research required.
Re:It's sad . . . (Score:2, Interesting)
The secular nature of the regime was much stronger before the first Gulf war and the sanctions and bad governance that screwed up the Iraqi economy. The education of women and their participation in political and economic life, the prevalance of a largely secular middle class, and the fact that Christians (like Tariq Aziz) could hold political power are evidence of secular nature of the regime.
The fact that Saddam felt he had to polish his Islamist credentials to bolster his power does not change the basic secular orientation of his Baathist regime. Baathism was/is a pan-Arab socialist ideology, pretty much devoid of Islamic pretensions. Compare to Egypt and Syria, which are relativly secular regimes.
The concentration of power among Sunnis is primarily due to the tribal nature of Saddam's power (he was Sunni, his clan was Sunni, his region was Sunni), and also because Shiites were poorer, felt to be less loyal to his regime, and more likely to fall under Iranian influence.
Also, if Shiite's were allowed to hold power, the presence of the Shiite holy sites in Iraq would given Shiite imams an independent source of legitimacy, which the Sunni's could not match (because their holy sites are in Saudia Arabia and Israel.)
An Atheist's Guide to Mohammedanism (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Uh, no... (Score:3, Interesting)
No, it's not. It's a belief.
Are you Jewish?
I ask because I've asked one of my 'Jewish' friend about this and he says he agrees with the first quote. You seem to think differently, but is this as a Jew or as a Christian?
My friends take on this is that the Romans were persecuting the Jews so they were looking for a Messiah/Saviour to lead them out from under the Romans, much like Moses did with the Egyptians.
To me, this makes sense. If the jews were expecting Jesus to lead them away, I bet they were severly dissapointed if not downright pissed off with the whole 'turn the other cheek' thing. Enough for Judas to turn him over to the Romans to make way for a real leader and enough for the Jews to pick a criminal to release rather than Jesus as some serious payback for false hopes.
Re:Discrimination (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh, and if you still think the a-bomb was a bad thing, ask some elderly Chinese or Koreans (i.e. people who actually lived through what the Japanese did) what they think about it. Might find they wish the white guys had had a few dozen more a-bombs to drop.
Re:Those inventions aren't Islamic (Score:2, Interesting)
She has wikipedia article [wikipedia.org], and has since appeared on Israeli public radio [israelnationalnews.com].
Galen -- Roman Doctor (Score:2, Interesting)
There's going to be a ton of errors with this exhibit because it neglects to remember that there were strong, prosperous, and clever civilizations of the Middle East before Arab domination. Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Persian Empire all laid the groundwork for learning and inventing. Additionally, the whole Middle East was a crossroads for that allowed knowledge, technology, and goods to flow to it.
Re:Noticed also. (Score:5, Interesting)
Christian definition of Jewish Messiah (Score:2, Interesting)
That's a pretty controversial statement to make without support. Perhaps I just don't follow your logic, since the previous sentence seems to mistakenly use "Christian" twice in stead of "Jewish" (in one of those places, though I'm not sure which one).
I would appreciate it if you would clarify this.
Also (and please forgive me for any misconception, as I have already stated that I don't understand what you were trying to say), what is your operating Christian definition that excludes Jesus from being the Jewish Messiah?
I say this because I am a Christian, and I believe that Jesus was, is, and will be the Jewish Messiah. It's just that he was rejected by his brothers the first time around (much like Joseph, Moses, and David), and so he was sent to the gentiles (much like Joseph, Moses, and David) for a time, but (much like Joseph, Moses, and David) will return to his people Israel and be their deliverer. The fact that this has not yet happened does not (especially in the eyes of Christians) make him any less the Jewish Messiah.
So, if you would, please clarify your statements in the light of this.
Re:But... (Score:3, Interesting)
That's interesting. The Jews expected that, and Satan (or was that really Judas?) tempted Jesus to do just that. My brother quoted an esoteric scripture stating that if Jesus rejected being a political leader, people would turn against him. Which is sortof what happened.
All speculation of course, but just wonder if he had accepted that challenge...? Would have been an extremely interesting twist of history. Jesus (IMO) had the compassion to become a great leader, had he bothered to get his hands dirty. Then perhaps there'd be no opening for Mohammad to set his bloody precedents [answering-islam.org.uk], either.
OK, that was pretty hypothetical :)
Re:But... (Score:3, Interesting)
... just like the canonical ones, then.
Re:Christian definition of Jewish Messiah (Score:3, Interesting)
Soviet physics (Score:3, Interesting)
You are mixing up Communists and Nazis. Nazis banned relativity and quantum mechanics as "Jewish physics". By contrast, Soviet leaders (despite being antisemitic) recognized that Jewish physicists and physics were absolutely vital for building nukes and missiles.
The real reason Soviet physics started to fall behind the West was that
a. an enormous number of talented European Jewish physicists had fled to America in the 1930's, while nobody wanted to flee to Stalin's welcoming arms;
b. for some time in the 1940s-1950s, computer science was considered to be anti-Soviet, which meant that Soviet computer technology (vital for physics!) remained a decade or so behind the West all the way to the end of the Cold War;
c. too large a percentage of Soviet physicists were put to work in the military industrial complex, and many of their discoveries were classified. By contrast, in the post-WW2 West, most physicists tended to do unclassified work in the universities.