[FoRK] Nietzsche's Severe Rationalism

[Kevin Elliott]

On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:48 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:

> I agree, forward progression rules, for good reasons.
>
> I will point out some perceived backsliding that comes to mind,  
> mostly local and possibly necessary to get out of local minima, but  
> apparently regressive in a certain realm:
>
> The rise of Chinese science, and then its stifling via some  
> combination of bad government and sick philosophy / religion.
> Same thing with Arab science.
> The rise and fall of Aztecs, although that didn't get much out of  
> the primitive stages to really be significant.
> The fall of the Roman Empire, although that was fueled by an  
> artificial and unsustainable slave / conquering model.

All true... the difficult problem is unwinding whether _AVERAGE_  
progress was actually slowed worldwide, etc...  Rome fell, but other  
civilizations rose in it's ashes.  Even at the time, I don't see how  
it effected say India or China at all.  It's also important to not  
confuse technical progress with "Progress".

Technical knowledge certainly fell as Rome collapsed, but did "total  
misery"?  Rome kept an awful lot of slaves, and if your being born  
"randomly", nothing prevents you from being "Roman Slave" rather than  
"Citizen of Rome".

As I said, it's a difficult problem to unwind...