Author of piece here. Fun to read the discussions. A few comments @roenxi: I agree that the precision obsession is central and not about super advanced math. H

Author of piece here. Fun to read the discussions. A few comments @roenxi: I agree that the precision obsession is central and not about super advanced math. However, it's clear that it does require explicit quantification, and it was not done in the middle ages say. Also, the era does not only see the rise of manufacturing (where precision is key), but also Newtonian science, accounting, financial markets, and better navigation and cartography. When trying to explain these things jointly, you land in the diffusion of the calculating paradgim. @Animats: We don't give it a lot of space, but we do mention that practical engineers used little math: "Before the Industrial Revolution, however, aspiration often outran achievement. Many of Leonardo’s machines were famously unworkable, and while Ramelli’s machinery book was popular, practitioners remained unimpressed. Before the Industrial Revolution, men of practice often saw mathematicians as frivolous." When you discuss the type of math that was important, I also think that you aim a bit too high. Calculus is useful, but a lot is just really getting the most out of simple arithmetic. @082349872349872: We're not claiming that it works for other things than math. Clearly the strateg works because there is mathematical structure in the world.... @ecshafer: Isn't this strengthening our point? Yes, during this era of broad spectrum of activities were conducted by "mathematical practictioners" which blended a lot of disciplines. That suggests math as a unifying glue. Also, we don't neglect trial and error and practical skills. That's the whole point of the industrial revolution section: "the Industrial Revolution required that basic mathematics and a quantitative outlook reached the class of people actually engaged in production". But trial and error was nothing new. Mathematized production was. @303uru: I don't deny these points; there's always complexity. But if a single factor accounts for a lot of things, it should be noted.