What did Islamic Golden Age even do?
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
What did Islamic Golden Age even do?
What did Islamic Golden Age even do?
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
could ask the same thing about the romans
they both took from other civilizations and expanded upon them
Romans invented concrete. They were exceptional architects, geometers and mathematicians. Also they basically invented modern administration systems and standardised mass production and logistics.
it’s the greeks who are mathematicians
the rest you are right on
>and mathematician
Name one, except the guy who made Augustus’ obelisk clock (relying on established greek maths and not making theoretical discoveries) there aren’t any
>Name one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoras
So good at math, he either invented the Pythagorean theorem, Pythagorean tuning, discovered the five regular solids, the Theory of Proportions, the sphericity of the Earth, and the identity of the morning and evening stars as the planet Venus.
OR he was so smart that he's the reason the people who would do those things, would give him credit/honours. Regardless, he's crazy important in the history of math.
But he wasn't a Roman.
>Jews=0.2% world population: 22% Nobel prize
>Islamists=25% world pop: 1.6% Nobel prize
Islamist gaytards for the win. Takbiiir
It's almost like millennia of inbreeding is a bad idea. Who could have figured that out in time to prevent the dysgenic collapse of Dar-al-Islam?
>It's almost like millennia of inbreeding is a bad idea.
What do you think israelites have been doing for the past 2,000 years you troglodyte.
Nobel prize nomination is known to be biased, they didn't give tolstoy a literature prize and opted for some nordick pseud just because of racial reasons. You can't convince anyone that the israeli cabal running the globe wouldnt do the same
Islamic scientists predicted the computer chip
Cam you elaborate and give source? I'm genuinely curious
that Sicilian moron is insufferable
>the koran prodickted mahdon invenshunz inch-allah
Your "scientific predictions" don't mean anything if they aren't put towards anything useful
It wasn't muslims who invented the computer chip after hearing about it in the Quran. It was Western scientists and engineers who viewed islam as little more than a rip-off version of christianity at best
>It wasn't muslims who invented the computer chip after hearing about it in the Quran.
Every Islamist believes the Quran contains ALL the knowledge of the Universe. They believe the West stole all their scientific advancements from the Quran, they literally believe the West is doing Quran reverse engineering in R&D labs.
>It wasn't muslims who invented the computer chip
lmao
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_M._Atalla
They conquered all of the largest libraries of their time and then passed off the Greek and Persian inventions as their own. Centuries later, scholars get to marvel at how smart they were, and how odd it was as soon as Islam asserted its authority over the schools and libraries, the whole region went backwards.
>greek inventions
Yes that’s true
>persian inventions
Lmao
inventions
>Lmao
????
Are you just ignorant or what?
Here is a small list of some of the supposed "Islamic innovators" in the supossed "Islamic golden age", you will see they are actually Persian in origin:
>Avicenna: A Persian polymath who is considered one of the most important figures in the history of medicine.
>Rhazes: A Persian physician, alchemist, and philosopher who made significant contributions to the fields of medicine, chemistry, and astronomy.
>Omar Khayyam: A Persian polymath who is best known for his work on mathematics and astronomy, but who also made significant contributions to poetry and philosophy.
>Nasir al-Din Tusi: A Persian polymath who made significant contributions to mathematics, astronomy, and philosophy.
We’re talking about pre islamic persians who didn’t speak and study in arabic, muslim scholars credited greek philosophers not a single one credited a pre islamic persian nobody
>Pre islamic persian inventions:
>Ancient Persian technology and inventors were among the foremost in raising the quality of life and standard of living for citizens of the empire. Irrigation and windmills were two examples of innovations that were beneficial to an agrarian society. However, Persians also developed early versions of refrigeration and even rudimentary air conditioning.
>The dry climate of the Middle East, where the Persian Empire was located, required significant innovation to create proper energy usage for processing foodstuffs and irrigation or watering for the farming needs of the empire. The Persians made use of tall vertical windmills built from clay, wood, and straw that used the horizontal drag force to move turbines and turn a central mast. Because certain areas in Persia get high winds, such windmills were extremely useful in transferring wind energy into power to grind grain. In some areas of modern-day Iran, these same windmills are still in use after 1000 years, a strong testament to the strength of Ancient Persia.
>First Declaration of Human Rights
>Irrigation and Refrigeration
>Landscaped Gardens and the Word 'Paradise'
>The famous Guitar instrument.
>Zoroastrianism philosophy
>Elite Military Units and Uniforms
>Windmills and Air Conditioning
>Postal System and the Highway/Achaemenid royal roads
>The Teaching Hospital
>Heavily Armored Cavalry
Those are literally mesopotamian you’re just parroting
>Those are literally mesopotamian you’re just parroting
>Mesopotamian
>Literally could mean anything ranging from Sumer-Akkad, Babylon and Assyria.
You are just an illiterate moron.
could mean anything ranging from Sumer-Akkad, Babylon and Assyria.
Point is they’re not persian only “human rights” whatever that means are actually persian
Really? I always thought they took on a lot of Persian art and architecture.
It's the ISLAMIC Golden Age, not the ARAB Golden Age you utter moron.
At the end of the day islam hasn't contributed much but the early caliphates were pretty good at utilizing the greek knowledge they took from the Byzantine and the Persians and became a world power.
Imagine if Charles Martel hadn't stopped the muzzies at tours. Europeans would all be speaking Arabic, the enlightenment would never have happened, no industrial revolution, no internet. China probably discover America first and claim the continent.
Good job the muzzies were stopped tbh. Right now they are only fricking over the middle east.
>What did Islamic Golden Age even do?
Preserved Greek and other cultures writings I guess which may or may not have been preserved anyway
Yes, literally it was "when Persians took over they stopped burning every book and scroll they could find from the remnants Eastern Roman Empire".
Literally the great accomplishment was that Persian rulers prevented Arabs from continuing to burn everything European civilization had written down in the area and realising it is actually useful.
>Preserved Greek
Byzantines did that
>and other cultures writings
Syriac Christians did that who in turn taught the Muslim invaders
take poo to loo
Half of this picture is complete bullshit.
1. Egyptians had the first decimal system and the zero is from Greece. The ignorance of Fibonnaci's numerical system keeps getting replaced with another assigning it to Indians.
2. Universities are a European invention. Neither India nor Muslims had them until modern times. They had "monastic schools", which Europe also had centuries before universities not to mention philosophy schools etc.
3. Hospitals are again also grown out monestaries/crusaders. Other organised healing houses are not the same thing. Just about everyone had the latter.
>n-no you see we wuz da real scientists
Just as embarrassing and pathetic tbh
>Universities are a European invention.
People won't accept this but it's true.
Europe had multiple technologies of craft and mind that were combined together at universities, merchant guilds, and upper class academic clubs. This happened for a sustained period of time with intellectuals communicating and collaborating continent-wide. The goal of these intellectuals was closer to social clout (or 'for the sake of knowledge' if you're less cynical). They didn't necessarily pursue direct engineering or financial applications of their endeavors even when borrowing from these other disciplines. This phenomena just didn't happen anywhere else.
Many cultures had individual engineering feats, or conceptual mathematical technologies. But again, they lacked this constellation of academic collaboration and adjunct tech/concepts existing for such a long period of time. It's not enough to have a handful of Archimedes, you need hundreds of Archimedes working collaboratively over centuries.
They needed people who could make micro-tools like watchmakers. They needed a large base of people who could do complex math. This was only possible by dropping inefficiencies like Roman numerals and the development of a large math literate merchant class (people calculating interest, odds) who had the money to have their children formally educated in math. They needed the development of rule of law, standards of war, and be able to defend themselves from other cultures and remain stable. One can't develop this type of proto scientific culture if cities are constantly being razed by neighbors and the land owners executed, or Mongols/Ottomons are invading*, or the king can seize property at a whim.
Science developed just once. 1400s to 1700s as natural philosophy. 1700s to mid 1800s as disciplines with increasingly organized methods. Mid-1800s to now with highly refined methods and extending science into fields like engineering, medicine, etc.
*The Mongols not invading past Hungary and Poland was incredible luck. The British Isles and Central Europe were borderline unassailable from an outside force for geographic reasons. The exception to this being the Mongols who must have had 'ignores terrain and logistical distance's as a civ perk.
Lmao, mongs physically couldn't expand past hungary because the mong invasion was facilitated by conquered horseBlack person armies adding to their own, like a game of crusader kings. Once they got onto feudal Christian land they just started hacking peasants down because they couldn't use them in their armies and eventually ran out of gas
The precise reason doesn't matter. It just matters that they couldn't invade North Central Europe.
>Central Europe were borderline unassailable from an outside force for geographic reasons.
Castles arent a geographic reason
>Science developed just once
Science is one of humanity's oldest inventions. There's relatively little difference between a scientist observing changes in a lab and a hunter trying out a different type of wood for a bow or a different material for arrowheads.
Alchemy was born out of human's reverence for metallurgy and the very real and observable physical changes of metals when melted and combined and many worshipped this practice.
What you're describing is the invention of microscopes and telescopes that were able to focus human eyes in real time on structures previously thought to be divine in nature and shrouded in spiritual and philosophical mumbojumbo. The interesting thing is how accurate the greeks were in their observations of something that was actually imperceptible to them
That's total bullshit.
Refining craft techniques isn't science, even if it would eventually contribute to scientific apparatuses. To the extent that any ancient thinkers engaged in controlled experiments, these were idiosyncratic and not disseminated widely. Trial and error in crafting and master-apprenticeship knowledge isn't the same as controlled experimentation of a model involving theoretical entities or predictive formula. And even model building and testing still requires a critical mass of experimenters and theoreticians to systematically refine and communicate discoveries.
Besides, there are countless historical examples of technological stagnation because engineering was simply craft knowledge. For example, shell first ship construction used 40-60% more wood and was used since the Ancient Egyptians to the decline of the Roman Empire.
Cathedrals, storm works, and other larger stoneworks were created via mason craft knowledge up until the early 1800s. This despite the fact that Newton/Leibniz math and physics discoveries were refined to a high degree for about one hundred years prior.
For example, a flood control system in say 1803 would be designed via piecemeal rules of thumb, shaped by civil masonry experience of project designers. At no point would an engineer calculate the optimal drainage hole size to empty a storm cistern--they weren't doing calculus to optimize such things.
The fact that science-based model testing didn't penetrate craft fields like surgery or engineering to any great degree until the 1840s-1890s shows that they were distinctive activities until that point.
>. There's relatively little difference between a scientist observing changes in a lab and a hunter trying out a different type of wood for a bow or a different material for arrowheads.
That's wrong. Hunting techniques are a trade simple as. Systematic knowledge gathering disciplines were actually extremely rare (even for studying trades and writing about them). The first one (Geometry) was developed by Ancient Greeks, the different disciplines of philosophy of course also count, but these were sparse even within Eurasia. Science is one such system, but not all systematic knowledge systems are a science by definition.
>Alchemy was born out of human's reverence for metallurgy and the very real and observable physical changes of metals when melted and combined and many worshipped this practice.
That's not at all what Alchemy was. The Greeks called it Chemistry already. Alchemy was an additional layer of (reasonable) superstition of Christian/Abrahamic ideas based in turn on old Gnostic ideas. The Great Work of Alchemy was to purify the essence of creation that God used to create the universe. Very reasonably they deduced that if you are able to control and understand such a substance then you could manipulate matter and become immortal/turn lead into gold etc.
However, again, this is a system of knowledge which is not a "science". It is quite literary the example used by Boyle in The Sceptical Chymist as a bad system of knowledge based on wishful thinking. The New Science/"Modern Science" that they developed during the Enlightenment was what we today call Science. It does not refer to "knowledge" like countless midwits think. Science is short for this specific discipline of Modern Science that they developed (which is no longer modern as it is centuries old, but still good).
>People won't accept this but it's true.
The fact that universities are a unique European development is very much an accepted fact in academic all circles. All else is negotiationist cope by browns who got a B- in their Bachelors degree at a Western model university probably built during the colonial era.
Gave a false sense of superiority to people who frick their cousins
>people who frick their cousins
they even stole that idea from the late dynastic Egyptians
No they don’t every single “ancient persian invention” (which were very few) was found to be mesoptamian
Nah, they brought Aryan technology to the region. The oldest proven math and astrology is from Western Steppe/Europe.
Lol what? No the earliest is by far Egyptian and Sumerian math
Islam discovered evolution first. See my man al-Jahiz and Nakhshabi
Evolution is a lie of the Devil
There was nothing islamic about it.
>Averroes
One thing for sure, this guy was a pure Aristotle Stan and hey, nothing wrong with that. Muslims here stan hitler because he allegedly killed 6 million israelites. Anyways, Scholarly sources, including Fakhry and the Encyclopedia of Islam, have named three works as Averroes's key writings in this area. Fasl al-Maqal ("The Decisive Treatise") is an 1178 treatise that argues for the compatibility of Islam and philosophy - Arnaldez 1986, pp. 911–912
This guy criticised Ashariites theology and philosophy of many other Muslim philosophers, something that philosophers do, not something special or "non Islamic"
- Arnaldez 1986, pp. 913–915
>Al Razi
The claims that are being made against Al Razi were made by Abu Hatim whom he had gotten in a debate with -
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, and Mehdi Amin Razavi, An Anthology of Philosophy in Persia, vol. 1, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 353, quote:
"Among the other eminent figures who attacked Rāzī are the Ismāʿīlī philosopher Abū Ḥatem Rāzī, who wrote two books to refute Rāzī's views on theodicy, prophecy, and miracles; and Nāṣir-i Khusraw. Shahrastānī, however, indicates that such accusations should be doubted since they were made by Ismāʿīlīs, who had been severely attacked by Muḥammad ibn Zakariyyā Rāzī"
>Ibn Al Haytham
The man only said that we must have something supported strong by evidence before believing in it, it isn't said anywhere in Islam that you can't question or can't verify the faith before believing in it. The IQfyner clearly hasn't studied Islam well, more on this part later.
>Al Sarakhsi
Ahmad ibn al-Tayyib al-Sarakhsi? or just Al-Sarakhsi? Two different people
just Al-Sarakhsi wasn't executed. Ahmad ibn al-Tayyib al-Sarakhsi was executed for his heretical beliefs, hence only point has been proven to be true so far but sadly, this guy is literally not known and never have I heard as a Muslim mention this person, the others are at least mentioned in our history lessons.
>Al Farabi
No evidence if he was actually executed as an apostate or if he was accused of as.
Now on to the second point:
>Islam doesn't allow questioning
Narrated Abu Hurairah:
that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "Whoever takes a path upon which to obtain knowledge, Allah makes the path to Paradise easy for him."
-Trimdhi 2646
Anas ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Seeking knowledge is an obligation upon every Muslim.”
-Ibn Mājah 224
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Whoever is asked about knowledge and he conceals it, Allah will clothe him with a bridle of fire on the Day of Resurrection.”
-Sunan al-Tirmidhī 2649
There are a lot of hadiths which encourage knowledge and you can learn about them if you just start reading the hadiths. We don't have any explicit verse nor writing in the Quran nor Sahih Hadith that states such absurdity that we can't question our faith.
>Greek-Dhimmi golden age:
Sadly the western reliance on arabic works as well as on arabic in general for the bible because arabic is the sister language of hebrew has been ignored completely here
and I am done, back to bed, Jazakallah
>the western reliance on arabic works as well as on arabic in general for the bible because arabic is the sister language of hebrew
You mean *Aramaic*, obviously. Closer to Syrian than Arab.
Arabic is like the 2nd cousin once removed to Hebrew. Both Hebrew and Aramaic belong to the NW Semetic family, whereas Arabic is it's own family
Syrian is an aramiac dialect but we don't have much evidence of Syrian-reliance by the west
"In most of the arts and sciences of civilization, medieval Europe was a
pupil and in a sense a dependent of the Islamic world, relying on Arabic versions even for many otherwise unknown Greek works"
- What Went Wrong pg.15
Arabic was heavily relied upon because of the works in arabic as well as because arabic was the closest thing we had to understand Hebrew.
I'd like to see your source on your claim anon.
>"In most of the arts and sciences of civilization, medieval Europe was a
>pupil and in a sense a dependent of the Islamic world, relying on Arabic versions even for many otherwise unknown Greek works"
>- What Went Wrong pg.15
Yes, but I think their interpretations of Greek works, especially those of Plato, were generally pretty lousy. A better understanding of those works came after the Middle ages than that which was had by Medieval hacks trying to emulate Avicenna. I don't think it's much of a coincidence that improvements in European society occurred when they were able to reject the influence of the Islamic world and establish a more direct connection to the classical world.
>advances came when arab works when rejected
Not really. There were many other factors that Europeans weren't able to actually thrive during the medieval times and I don't even need to give the reasons, after the collapse of Roman Empire, a big chunk of Europe if not the entire European continent came under depression.
>Better understanding came after Avicenna
Improvements occur everyday tbh, this doesn't really prove your point that getting rid of reliance on arabic works made Europeans thrive as well as nullify the authencity of the arabic works
>Not really.
Yes, really. The rejection of Alchemy epitomises getting rid of the last taint of superstitious mental maturbation.
Then it returned to Chemistry like the Greeks had.
> There were many other factors that Europeans weren't able to actually thrive during the medieval times and I don't even need to give the reasons, after the collapse of Roman Empire, a big chunk of Europe if not the entire European continent came under depression.
Europe DID thrive during the medieval ages. They built the tallest buildings on Earth during this time. They were superior by all objective metrics to both Ancients and everyone else on Earth.
if you can provide a source for your claim than that would be your nail in the coffin, otherwise I am simply rejecting your claim
>Europe DID thrive
>They were superior by all objective metrics
sure anon, we are talking about medieval europe, not from the period from 12th century
>advancements only came after rejection of Avicenna's style of philosophy
again, you need to provide proper evidence for the claim.
I am open to your claims tbh, you can probably be right here but without a proper source I'll have to reject your claims so take your time and provide a proper source to put the nail on the coffin.
>again, you need to provide proper evidence for the claim.
>I am open to your claims tbh, you can probably be right here but without a proper source I'll have to reject your claims so take your time and provide a proper source to put the nail on the coffin.
I mean it's my personal interpretation of the history of philosophy. I think when you look at the philosophy of the middle ages at most you get a few advancements in formal logic, and even then, medieval conceptions of logic are extremely limited, but I can't hold that against them. The extent to which every area in philosophy developed from Descartes up and including Kant surpasses all progress made during Middle ages, and it was only able to come about through the rejection of the style of philosophy created by Avicenna.
If you have a different interpretation, I'd be interested in hearing it.
>Personall interpretation
alright then, that's your opinion and I give you credit for being honest about it.
I have read a bit about Descartes in the book "100 rankings of the most influential people", great book by a white supremacist.
I like Descartes, his method certainly is a great one to determine whether something can be considered truth or not
>I'd like to hear your intrepretation
Here's what I think
Descartes not only rejected Avicenna's interpretation but Aristotle's philosophy as well
Earlier philosophers like Plato and Aristotle generally accepted the world we perceive as real. Descartes, however, introduced methodical doubt. He questioned everything, even the reliability of his senses. This skepticism became a springboard for him to find a foundation for certain knowledge.
This concept is central to Descartes' famous work, Meditations on First Philosophy. Throughout the Meditations, he engages in a systematic doubt of everything he previously believed, including the external world and sensory information.
For example, in Meditation One from Meditations on First Philosophy ([Cottingham, J., et al. (1985). The philosophical writings of Descartes. Cambridge University Press], p. 121), he writes: "I shall suppose that there is not a God, and that no sky and no earth exist; that there are no bodies, and no figure, no extension, no colour, no sound, no scent, no taste, no heat, no cold, no qualities whatsoever..." This demonstrates his methodical doubt as a starting point.
Aristotle's philosophy(please correct me if I am wrong) believed on Empiricism:
Aristotle was a strong advocate for observation and experience (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Aristotle: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle/). He believed knowledge comes from interacting with the world through our senses.
Tl;DR: Descartes disagreed with Aristotle's Empiricism as well. Hence while your point does make sense about Avicenna's philosophy being rejected, it also means that Aristotle's philosophy was rejected as well and Descartes has been quite influential in our history however he has been less influential than Aristotle himself (according to 100 A rankings) and sure he has contributed a lot to philosophy and gave rise to a new type of philosophy but I simply do not believe that the work of philosophy that came from him is better or worse than the works done during the Islamic Golden age because I am simply not that educated on philosophy, making the whole matter a work of "opinions by random IQfyners"
so what was the point in typing all of this if I am just going to say that?
The point is that the complete rejection of Avicenna's works didn't completely cause improvement in philosophy as I myself don't have the authority to prove how it was or was not improved.
lastly
>when you look at the philosophy of the middle ages at most you get a few advancements in formal logic, and even then, medieval conceptions of logic are extremely limited
we've had a lot of contributions done during the medieval era that surely has been influential as well, we simply don't have any metric that proves that the work done by rejection or acceptance of Avicenna's interpretations is objectively better or worse because it's an entire matter of a person's own opinions, morality and logic
understanding came after Avicenna
>Improvements occur everyday tbh, this doesn't really prove your point that getting rid of reliance on arabic works made Europeans thrive as well as nullify the authencity of the arabic works
I was not making the point that better understandings came after Avicenna, but that they came about only due to the rejection of Avicenna's style of philosophy. I appreciate the preservation that Islamic scholars were willing to do, but their engagement with them was embarrassing. The style of philosophy developed by Avicenna caused almost total philosophical stagnation in both the Muslim and Christian world, which was only broken by Descartes rejecting it as a starting point.
That being said I am willing to give the Muslims credit for their advancements in math, science and engineering. There certainly wouldn't be a Fibonacci without them .
Most of them were sincerely religious even if they had some strange beliefs. The real issue with them is that the style of philosophy they created was an intellectual dead-end and that all progress that has occurred in the field is due to Descartes rejecting their work as a starting point. The more intelligent thinkers from the Islamic world realized it, but none of them were able to come up with an adequate response.
Seethe more about us, infidel homosexuals
Why has islam never contributed anything positive to humanity? If Islam is so great why do you guys have virtually zero accomplishments in your 1400 year history? Why is the only thing the Arab world is known for is being the most inbred race on Earth?
Islam ousted the Goths from Italy and Spain, leading to the Renaissance there. It also developed unique forms of art and music
Arabs are the most genetically diverse of all races.
Britian had an IQ of 85. Until 1950.
moronic cope. Islamic Iberia was regressive. Europeans had built libraries and infrastructure all over the mediterranean and non-White barbarians burned it all down and destroyed civilization there.
After they were kicked out Muslims and the israelites the Spanish Golden age started.
Muslims were already mostly gone from Spain in the 1200s. It was ousting the Germans /Normans later from Italy that allowed the Med Renaissance and Golden Age.
The word Vandalism is given by the German Vandals occupying Rome
Oh no Anon! You didn't realise that by bringing Germans into this you have just highlighted the fact that the Golden age literally started on the return of German rule!
Any Spaniard would know this though, but of course you're shitskin non-European who doesn't know our history.
same thing about the christian golden age, all made up bullshit.
they enslaved a LOT of africans
>700 BC Greeks
? is this a reference to the griffin seal obtained with a magnifying glass? That's 1450 BC
>450 BC India
More like 200 BC, Indians didn't wirite in 400 BC
Reduced their Dick size
they collated and transmitted data from other places and also did their own stuff with mathematics and especially chemistry
Bro for them earth is flat
Islamic Golden Age was made up by marxoids after 9/11.
>Destroy a bunch of better civilizations
>Become the most advanced civilization
It's genius really
The Muslims in the Middle East made many important discoveries and inventions including coffee, the camera obscura, soap, the crank shaft, quilting, the pointed arch, surgical instruments, anesthetics, the windmill, smallpox inoculation, checks, and algebra. When the more powerful men acquired large harems of women, many of the common men were left without wives. From about 600 to about 1000 AD, cheap African slaves were imported as concubines, a practice that did not end until the 1960s. By 1200 AD, Arab advances in the arts and sciences had stopped. The average IQ in the Middle East is now about 83.
>From about 600 to about 1000 AD, cheap African slaves were imported as concubines, a practice that did not end until the 1960s.
Muslims love BBC cuckolding
>Muslim love BBC cuckolding
kek that bedouin guy had black ancestry, he's literally from the tribe known as "desert dwellers". Look bedouins up
I have read this before in IQfy and ironically the guy didn't provide any proper source for the claims he had made against the Muslim philosophers at all. The only valid argument can be the "Greek influence" argument but even that is stupid because everyone gets an influence by something at some point whether it's environmental influence or a figurative influence and as the teachings that were followed didn't go against Islam, it doesn't make the mentioned philosophers non-Muslim at all
>Avicenna
Ibn Sina was a devout Muslim and sought to reconcile rational philosophy with Islamic theology. He aimed to prove the existence of God and His creation of the world scientifically and through reason and logic. - Lenn Evan Goodman (2003), Islamic Humanism, pp. 8–9
His views on Islamic theology and philosophy were enormously influential, forming part of the core of the curriculum at Islamic religious schools until the 19th century. - James W. Morris (1992), "The Philosopher-Prophet in Avicenna's Political Philosophy", in C. Butterworth (ed.), The Political Aspects of Islamic Philosophy.
So you are telling me people who considered someone a non Muslim followed the non Muslim's theology?
All the heretical claims mentioned aren't anywhere to be found, the guy either made it up or just read it somewhere
>Coffee
Ethiopian
>Camera obscura
Literal allegory of the cave
>Soap
Predates muslims by millennia
>Crank shaft
Europoor
>Quilting
Predates Islam by millennia
>Pointed arch
Predates islam by millennia
>Surgical instruments
predates islam by millennia
>Anesthetics
Liquor and hash were used as anesthetic for millennia before Islam, modern anesthetics begins in England with nitrous oxide.
>Windmill
Persians had it in the 5th century BC
>Smallpox inoculation
Chinese made it first, Jenner's vaccine is the first true smallpox inoculation
>Checks
If this is about certificates of deposit, that's the Templars.
>Algebra
Greeks did it first.
Iranians have the same phenotype as they did a millennia ago
>symbolic algebra invented in Greece 250 BC
Don't know what that blurry picture us but that's definitely not true, unless it's in the same way the steam engine was invented in ancient Greece, i.e. somebody came up with it but it didn't go anywhere useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetica
Btw the bigger picture is that Enlightenment Europeans only ever cited Greeks and medieval Christian scholars.
The cope of Browns is not relevant to anything, their contributions to modern science and math is zero because they were not a part of the development at all as they were disconnected from the Western world that solved everything and then spread it everywhere. Independent scribblings (which were nearly always reinventions of Greek ideas) is not relevant to anything since no one used them or cited them.
Nothing, it's a reddit meme to pretend they achieved anything original on their own
since this thread is just
"my daddy did it"
"no my daddy did it"
instead of actually providing any evidence so let me give some evidence so the confusion can be cleared
>Crank
don't know what Muslims claim this but the earliest evidence for the crank combined with a connecting rod in a machine appears in the Roman Hierapolis sawmill in Asia Minor from the 3rd century AD and two Roman stone sawmills at Gerasa, Roman Syria, and Ephesus, Asia Minor (both 6th century AD).-Ritti, Grewe & Kessener 2007, p. 161
>Algebra
Who the frick said Greece invented it, The origins of algebra can be traced to the ancient Babylonians - (Boyer 1991, "Mesopotamia" p. 30
>Optics
Again, not fricking Greece, Optics began with the development of lenses by the ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians. The earliest known lenses, made from polished crystal, often quartz, date from as early as 2000 BC from Crete (Archaeological Museum of Heraclion, Greece). Lenses from Rhodes date around 700 BC, as do Assyrian lenses such as the Nimrud lens - "World's oldest telescope?". BBC News. July 1, 1999. Archived
>Man lifting Kite
Literally nowhere it says "China made that shit in 200 BC", do people not even check their shit once?
According to Aulus Gellius, the Ancient Greek philosopher, mathematician, astronomer, statesman, and strategist Archytas (428–347 BC) was reputed to have designed and built the first artificial, self-propelled flying device, a bird-shaped model propelled by a jet of what was probably steam, said to have actually flown some 200 metres around 400 BC - Darling, David J. (2003), The Complete Book of Spaceflight: From Apollo 1 to Zero Gravity
cont....
>Modern Numerals
Positional decimal notation including a zero symbol was developed in India, using symbols visually distinct from those that would eventually enter into international use. As the concept spread, the sets of symbols used in different regions diverged over time. However these weren't really the numerals that the arabs introduced to the world rather brahmi numerals which later were innovated by the arabs
>Hospitals
The history of hospitals began in antiquity with hospitals in Greece, the Roman Empire and on the Indian subcontinent as well, starting with precursors in the Asclepian temples in ancient Greece and then the military hospitals in ancient Rome. The Greek temples were dedicated to the sick and infirm but did not look anything like modern hospitals. The Romans did not have dedicated, public hospitals. Public hospitals, per se, did not exist until the Christian period - Smith, Virginia (2008). Clean: A History of Personal Hygiene and Purity.
Towards the end of the 4th century, the "second medical revolution"[2] took place with the founding of the first Christian hospital in the eastern Byzantine Empire by Basil of Caesarea, and within a few decades, such hospitals had become ubiquitous in Byzantine society. - Nutton, Vivian (2012). Ancient medicine. Routledge. pp. 306–307
The first documented general hospital arose in Baghdad in 805, built by the caliph Harun al-Rashid and his vizier, Yahya ibn Khalid.[- "Barmakids". Encyclopaedia of Islam, Although not much is known about this hospital due to poor documentation, the system of the general hospital itself set forth an example for the many other hospitals to come. By the year 1000, Baghdad had five more hospitals - Nagamia, Husain F (2001-08-03). "History of Islamic Medicine". Journal of the Islamic Medical Association of North America.
Please stop spreading this misinformation.
> decimal notation
Egypt invented the decimal system.
> including a zero symbol
It comes from the Greeks. Picrel is a 2nd century BC papyrus with the oldest zero symbol. Greeks used zero as a placeholder and they used the symbol "0", Ptolemy's used this zero as a placeholder in astronomical data. adapted from capital omnicron. There is zero evidence that Indians used this symbol until modern times. There are no Indian writings at all that predate the pre-modern ages (even the Rig Veda is from Nepal and the oldest known copy is only 4 centuries old). The modern numbers 1,2,3,4 are Visigothic and 5,6,7,8,9 in the European decimal system are due to Fibonacci.
>Hospital
The model for the Hospital was invented by the knights Hospitaller which in turn was based on Cisterian Monasteries. Older houses of healing are not the same model at all, but yes are found in many Ancient places as you mentioned.
I have provided sources, where are your sources?
It's clear who's spreading the misinformation
again with the
"my daddy did it!"
"no! no my daddy did it!"
>University
University can come under "higher learning institutions", Ancient Egyptians established an organization of higher learning – the Per-ankh, which means the “House of Life” in 2000 BCE - Lulat, Y. G.-M. (2005). A History of African Higher Education from Antiquity to the Present: A Critical Synthesis
.
The claim about India isn't strong but I'd like to see someone's source on it
>So Islam didn't contribute anything?
The point is being missed, the point is of contribution rather than invention. Saying that Muslims made this is simply not the wisest thing to say but what I can say based on the evidence I have is that arabs or Muslims of Arabia during the Islamic Golden age had innovated and improved the inventions, just like how normal scientists do! And that's the beauty of science where any person can contribute. The arguement of invention of the mentioned things is obviously dumb however saying that Muslims didn't bring any sort of innovation in these is simply unfair to say the least.
The innovations are given below:
>Algebra:
R. Rashed and Angela Armstrong write:
"Al-Khwarizmi's text can be seen to be distinct not only from the Babylonian tablets, but also from Diophantus' Arithmetica. It no longer concerns a series of problems to be resolved, but an exposition which starts with primitive terms in which the combinations must give all possible prototypes for equations, which henceforward explicitly constitute the true object of study. On the other hand, the idea of an equation for its own sake appears from the beginning and, one could say, in a generic manner, insofar as it does not simply emerge in the course of solving a problem, but is specifically called on to define an infinite class of problems." - Rashed, R.; Armstrong, Angela (1994), The Development of Arabic Mathematics
hence making algebra an arab innovation or invention as it's distinct from babylonian ones, both can be true
cont...
>mfw IQfy keeps on giving me cooldowns
>University
In Fez, Fatima al-Fihri established a madraza in 859 CE, which eventually became the organization of higher learning, the currently named University of al-Qarawiyyin. - Peters, Michael A. (2019)
>Gliding:
Only this is the valid argument as we don't have strong accounts of Abbas Ibn Firnas actually doing it but just for the lolz:
According to some secondary sources, about 20 years before Ibn Firnas attempted to fly he may have witnessed Firman as he wrapped himself in a loose cloak stiffened with wooden struts and jumped from a tower in Córdoba, intending to use the garment as wings on which he could glide. The alleged attempt at flight was unsuccessful, but the garment slowed his fall enough that he sustained only minor injuries. - John H. Lienhard (2004). "'Abbas Ibn Firnas". The Engines of Our Ingenuity. Episode 1910.
>Optics
Ibn Sahl (c. 940–1000), a mathematician and physicist connected with the court of Baghdad, wrote a treatise On Burning Mirrors and Lenses in 984 in which he set out his understanding of how curved mirrors and lenses bend and focus light. Ibn Sahl is credited with discovering the law of refraction, now usually called Snell's law. - K. B. Wolf, "Geometry and dynamics in refracting systems", European Journal of Physics 16, p. 14-20, 1995., R. Rashed, "A pioneer in anaclastics: Ibn Sahl on burning mirrors and lenses", Isis 81, p. 464–491, 1990.
cont...
>Modern Numbers
The immediate ancestors of the digits now commonly called "Arabic numerals" were introduced to Europe in the 10th century by Arabic speakers of Spain and North Africa, with digits at the time in wide use from Libya to Morocco. In the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula, the Arabs were using the Eastern Arabic numerals or "Mashriki" numerals: ٠, ١, ٢, ٣, ٤, ٥, ٦, ٧, ٨, ٩ - Burnett, Charles (2002). Dold-Samplonius, Yvonne; Van Dalen, Benno; Dauben, Joseph; Folkerts, Menso (eds.). From China to Paris: 2000 Years Transmission of Mathematical Ideas
Arabs introduced the west with the numerals hence innovating the base numerals that the indians made making Arabs still the inventors of the numerals you use as your pin or use to call someone however I would be lying to say that Indians didn't invent the base for it.
>Crank
The crank appears in the mid-9th century in several of the hydraulic devices described by the Banū Mūsā brothers in their Book of Ingenious Devices - A. F. L. Beeston, M. J. L. Young, J. D. Latham, Robert Bertram Serjeant (1990), The Cambridge History of Arabic Literature, Cambridge University Press, p. 266
These devices, however, made only partial rotations and could not transmit much power,[36] although only a small modification would have been required to convert it to a crankshaft - Banu Musa, Donald Routledge Hill (1979), The book of ingenious devices (Kitāb al-ḥiyal), Springer, pp. 23–4
Al-Jazari (1136–1206) described a crank and connecting rod system in a rotating machine in two of his water-raising machines.[38] His twin-cylinder pump incorporated a crankshaft. - Sally Ganchy, Sarah Gancher (2009), Islam and Science, Medicine, and Technology
after that, we don't really have any of the evidence that Islamic scientists contribution to the crank
Hence, I am ending the argument, Muslims did contribute in science, they gave us the innovations for the inventions that we had and innovated or improved it
>University of al-Qarawiyyin
This was founded in 1971.
Nice try lying filth.
What's the difference between discovering something first, and discovering something later without awareness of it existing prior? Not saying that this is the case, it's just something I always wondered.
Kys, snow Black person garbage. We're not your tool for LARPing. You are worse than israelites and Arabs btw.
Pre-islamic Iranians were completely irrelevant idk why.
>conquer most civilized region in the west
>people of said region discover/invent things
wow islam is so great
Iranians cluster with ancient Iron Age samples from NW Iran dating to ~800 BCE, Dinkha Tepe BIA B and Teppe Hasanlu IA. Iranians have ~90% genetic continuity to those NW Iranic groups. Population genetics does not show Iranians as mongrels.
Kys, snow Black person garbage
well they stole Hindu numerals and gave them to Europoors
frfr though, they accomplished quite a lot in a few centuries
high purity alcohol distillation comes to mind immediately, they got very good at that and it's an underrated important step for medicine
>What did Islamic Golden Age even do?
Rampages across Southern Europe and Northern Africa destroying everything in their path before losing momentum and falling into irrelevance.