How about we take the scientific achievement that took place within different cultures. It just happens that's just what this book is about.
Of course, people who argue for the "equality" of different creeds and ideologies won't like the book, at all. It makes mention of several ancient cultures that did make scientific advances, however as is obvious to see anywhere in the world today, all save 1 failed. ("equality" of creeds strikes me as being such an obvious untruth that it baffles the mind as to think rational people can actually believe it, after all if they're all "equal" then how could it possibly be that there's more than one ? How can people who build upon math, who proclaim math's achievements, believe that the principle of the excluded third is wrong ? Talk about contradictory ... but that's just me)
Mayans, Incas, Chinese, Hindus, Japanese, Egyptians, Persians ... all made scientific advancements earlier than European civlization. Muslims, Mongols, other Chinese ... killed, conquered and massacred their way to richess and scientific knowledge far beyond what contemporary Europeans had. Muslims should really be split up in 3 groups. The original arab conquerors. Then their slaves killed them and took over (the "mamluks") and then they killed themselves while carrying out jihad against Christians and Jews, only to be replaced by invading Ottomans ("Turks" more or less).
And all these civilizations have one thing in common : they all perished. Every last one. Most of these (all except the Chinese) even eradicated their scientific knowledge (esp. the muslims were good at this), and went backward in technological development instead of forward.
The sad truth is, that there is a single ideology whose adherents have produced over 99% of all scientific knowledge, and who are the only ones who rescued the remaining 1% from destruction. There is one person who exemplifies the singular ideology that created our current level of knowledge : Saint Thomas Aquinas.
Why did he learn science ? Why should humans conduct science and improve themselves using it ? To get to know the beauty of God (as in Christ) better. The catholic church followed him (eventually) and we all know the result. This very forum is built upon his legacy, as is nearly everything we have around us.
That's the thesis of this book, and the guy makes a very convincing case. No doubt though, that lots of people, who might be reasonably accused of hating the ideology in question, will deny this.
Quote from the book :
âoeEvidence scattered from Angkor Wat to Machu Picchu attests to the ability of human beings throughout the globe, not confined to the leading civilizations, to achieve amazing technological feats. And yet, and yetâ¦.Modern Europe has overwhelmingly dominated accomplishment in both the arts and sciences. The estimates of the European contribution are robust. They cannot, in any way I have been able to devise, be attenuated more than fractionally.
Unfortunately if you read the book it will become clear just how much the author dislikes this observation. 3 "fields of science and arts" were created with the express purpose of not having any competing Europeans. Arabic literature (dominated by Jews), Indian philosophy (as Europeans dominate what you might call "eastern philosophy" too, certainly up until the 1990's), and Chinese arts (which somehow magically includes the printing press ("invented" by a Chinese emperor, who did nothing with it))
The author concludes the quote above, however, with this remark, even if it's slightly out of scope for the book :
As I write, it appears that Europeâ(TM)s run is over. In another few hundred years, books will probably be exploring the reasons why some completely different part of the world became the locus of great human accomplishment. Now is a good time to stand back in admiration. What the human species is today owes in astonishing degree to what was accomplished in just half a dozen centuries by the peoples of one small portion of the northwestern Eurasian land mass. Not only does Europe dominate the narrative of human accomplishment, so does the minority that has become known in recent years as dead white males.â
So in other words, what made Europeans unique in the pursuit of science and arts is dead or dying. A visit to any university, even the legendary Sorbonne, will unfortunately confirm this. It's dying. It's dying a very, very slow death though, so there is hope that it can be revived.
It seems praying would be the correct course of action. At least that's what motivated one hell of a lot of important scientists, ironically including Charles Darwin and others ...