77
ontologically evil human being
(lemmy.nz)
He is the definition of fun police. Also the murder, starvation and general oppression of indigenous populations.
some added context
Technically he is not directly responsible for all of these things but in all cases played some role. Death to the great man theory of history and so on.
Baconian method. And invented clinical trials, which is a fundamental part of science.
The Ottomans restricted the printing press due to religion and the madrasa system focused on religion, not science. Still does.
Pointing to specific instances of scientific development and religious interference with scientific development does not create an argument. You have to add analysis that places these examples within their respective historical, political, economic, and cultural contexts. Then use that to support a defensible claim.
Regardless, none of your examples address the core of my argument which was, to clarify, that investment in abstract sciences originates from specific economic necessities rooted in the dominant mode of production rather than ideological dispositions. The existing ideological perspectives surrounding scientific development form as political and social justification for the meeting of those material economic needs. Not the other way around.
It's just a fact of history. The Islamic golden age was from the 8th to 14th century.
Your criticism of Cromwell uses presentism. Which is pretty stupid. Especially when you consider the fact that these medieval theology nutters are still preaching it now lol
Handwaving all of Islam, painting Arabic people as anti scientific, and claiming Brits invented science is some of the most bigoted, ahistorical, chauvinistic horse shit I've ever read. You are a bog standard reactionary clown.
The person you're replying to is smarter than you btw.
If only you could understand irony.
The post is about religion and societies based on religious purity.
We fucked all our religious nutters off to America.