2 ms·

A fair assertion. Also, it is important to note Adam Smith et. al. got many of their ideas from the Islamic world (credit economy and such), not from Protestant

A fair assertion. Also, it is important to note Adam Smith et. al. got many of their ideas from the Islamic world (credit economy and such), not from Protestant reforms. Popular history seldom gives the Islamic world the credit it deserves for influencing later progress in Europe. There's a good case to be made that in the absence of Arab advances, Europe would have remained mired in feudal states and regional economies for a much longer time. Whether the reader finds this change positive or negative ... reflects their views on the merits of nationalism, and ultimately globalism.

obstacle1 14y ago
It is not fair to say that Adam Smith et. al. got their ideas from the Islamic world and not from Protestant reforms. Surely some inspiration came from both. Further in the absence of Arab advances, we can't tell what the would would have looked like. It certainly wouldn't look like our current world, but there are a ton of possible worlds out there. You can't predict alternative histories retrospectively with any certainty. Nassim Taleb expounds on this in his latest book "Antifragile". He points out that while Adam Smith certainly drew inspiration from Arab philosophers (Al Ghazali in particular), we can't say how the world would look today without that particular intersection having happened.
michaelochurch 14y ago
You make a great point. The Arab world (and, to a lesser degree, the Byzantine Empire) preserved and continued Western progress. For a long time, Baghdad and Beijing (and, quite possibly, Alexandria) were centers of the civilized world. By the Enlightenment, the great ideas were coming from all over-- American Indian civilizations, pirate ship organizations, the Arab world, and (later) the East. The (mostly American?) idea that the bulk of progress came from a bunch of bigoted Puritans is pure credit-taking. They played a role, but a small one compared to Parisian salons. In fact, the Pilgrims had the opportunity to "live in religious freedom" in the Netherlands and left because it was too liberal.

obstacle1 14y ago

It is not fair to say that Adam Smith et. al. got their ideas from the Islamic world and not from Protestant reforms. Surely some inspiration came from both. Further in the absence of Arab advances, we can't tell what the would would have looked like. It certainly wouldn't look like our current world, but there are a ton of possible worlds out there. You can't predict alternative histories retrospectively with any certainty. Nassim Taleb expounds on this in his latest book "Antifragile". He points out that while Adam Smith certainly drew inspiration from Arab philosophers (Al Ghazali in particular), we can't say how the world would look today without that particular intersection having happened.

michaelochurch 14y ago

You make a great point. The Arab world (and, to a lesser degree, the Byzantine Empire) preserved and continued Western progress. For a long time, Baghdad and Beijing (and, quite possibly, Alexandria) were centers of the civilized world. By the Enlightenment, the great ideas were coming from all over-- American Indian civilizations, pirate ship organizations, the Arab world, and (later) the East. The (mostly American?) idea that the bulk of progress came from a bunch of bigoted Puritans is pure credit-taking. They played a role, but a small one compared to Parisian salons. In fact, the Pilgrims had the opportunity to "live in religious freedom" in the Netherlands and left because it was too liberal.