4 ms·

>I asked what he thought of what happened in the Arabic and Iranian regions during that time, he replied: Nothing significant. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M

>I asked what he thought of what happened in the Arabic and Iranian regions during that time, he replied: Nothing significant. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine_in_the_medieval_Islamic_world#Medical_contributions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine_in_the_medieval_Islam... I mean... based on that article alone, that seems to be substantially true, if overly harsh? Half of it are "discoveries" which were lost or disregarded and had to be "re-discovered", and IMO those are not discoveries at all since they change or affect nothing. The Book of Optics seems to be the only notable exception in that contributions section.

belugacat 4y ago
> substantially true, if overly harsh That tracks with the professor being French.
ineedasername 4y ago
There is a difference to be made between specific discoveries and overall progress as a world civilization. It seems strange to say that nothing was discovered simply because it didn't have a lasting impact. It may be accurate to say the Western world hadn't discovered it, or learned of that discover by others, or that the discovery was lost, but not that it wasn't actually discovered. It's the pinnacle of "Not Invented Here" Discovery and influence or impact simply aren't the same things.
gilleain 4y ago
How were they lost or rediscovered? "Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi (Latinized: Rhazes) (born 865) was one of the most versatile scientists of the Islamic Golden Age ... Many of his books were translated into Latin, and he remained one of the undisputed authorities in European medicine well into the 17th century." "Ibn Sina, more commonly known in west as Avicenna was a Persian polymath and physician of the tenth and eleventh centuries. He was known for his scientific works, but especially his writing on medicine." "Ibn Buṭlān, ... was an Arab physician who was active in Baghdad during the Islamic Golden Age.[64] He is known as an author of the Taqwim al-Sihhah (The Maintenance of Health تقويم الصحة), in the West, best known under its Latinized translation, Tacuinum Sanitatis (sometimes Taccuinum Sanitatis)." More than this, a lot of the scholarship in the Islamic world preserved discoveries by the Greeks: "Galen is one of the most famous scholars and physicians of classical antiquity. Today, the original texts of some of his works, and details of his biography, are lost, and are only known to us because they were translated into Arabic" Or did the Greeks not 'actually' discover anything, either?
- ncmncm 4y ago
  Not to neglect Al-Haytham, inventor of science itself, as presented in his book, Optics.
tshaddox 4y ago
> Half of it are "discoveries" which were lost or disregarded and had to be "re-discovered", and IMO those are not discoveries at all since they change or affect nothing. Surely the relevant consideration should be how much the discovery affected people at the time, not whether the discovery was eventually lost and needed to be re-discovered. Consider that all discoveries we have made could eventually be lost. It certainly doesn't diminish the historical significance of the discovery of penicillin if that discovery is lost in the population bottleneck caused by the 2095 A.I. War and only re-discovered 100 years after that.
ch4s3 4y ago
This seems incorrect. The idea of pharmacology as a separate discipline and profession comes from the Islamic golden age[1]. Optics lead to the microscope, so that’s pretty big. The work in translating and preserving Greek medical works was mostly undertaken during the Islamic golden age. The Ottomans pioneered clean water as a source of health and the regulation of medicine as a profession. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5723183/#:~:text=In%20the%20history%20of%20medicine,the%20strong%20development%20of%20pharmacy https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5723183/#:~:tex....

belugacat 4y ago

> substantially true, if overly harsh That tracks with the professor being French.

ineedasername 4y ago

There is a difference to be made between specific discoveries and overall progress as a world civilization. It seems strange to say that nothing was discovered simply because it didn't have a lasting impact. It may be accurate to say the Western world hadn't discovered it, or learned of that discover by others, or that the discovery was lost, but not that it wasn't actually discovered. It's the pinnacle of "Not Invented Here" Discovery and influence or impact simply aren't the same things.

gilleain 4y ago

How were they lost or rediscovered? "Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi (Latinized: Rhazes) (born 865) was one of the most versatile scientists of the Islamic Golden Age ... Many of his books were translated into Latin, and he remained one of the undisputed authorities in European medicine well into the 17th century." "Ibn Sina, more commonly known in west as Avicenna was a Persian polymath and physician of the tenth and eleventh centuries. He was known for his scientific works, but especially his writing on medicine." "Ibn Buṭlān, ... was an Arab physician who was active in Baghdad during the Islamic Golden Age.[64] He is known as an author of the Taqwim al-Sihhah (The Maintenance of Health تقويم الصحة), in the West, best known under its Latinized translation, Tacuinum Sanitatis (sometimes Taccuinum Sanitatis)." More than this, a lot of the scholarship in the Islamic world preserved discoveries by the Greeks: "Galen is one of the most famous scholars and physicians of classical antiquity. Today, the original texts of some of his works, and details of his biography, are lost, and are only known to us because they were translated into Arabic" Or did the Greeks not 'actually' discover anything, either?

ncmncm 4y ago
Not to neglect Al-Haytham, inventor of science itself, as presented in his book, Optics.

tshaddox 4y ago

> Half of it are "discoveries" which were lost or disregarded and had to be "re-discovered", and IMO those are not discoveries at all since they change or affect nothing. Surely the relevant consideration should be how much the discovery affected people at the time, not whether the discovery was eventually lost and needed to be re-discovered. Consider that all discoveries we have made could eventually be lost. It certainly doesn't diminish the historical significance of the discovery of penicillin if that discovery is lost in the population bottleneck caused by the 2095 A.I. War and only re-discovered 100 years after that.

ch4s3 4y ago

This seems incorrect. The idea of pharmacology as a separate discipline and profession comes from the Islamic golden age[1]. Optics lead to the microscope, so that’s pretty big. The work in translating and preserving Greek medical works was mostly undertaken during the Islamic golden age. The Ottomans pioneered clean water as a source of health and the regulation of medicine as a profession. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5723183/#:~:text=In%20the%20history%20of%20medicine,the%20strong%20development%20of%20pharmacy https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5723183/#:~:tex....