Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

The Acceleration of Knowledge and Therefore,

Rate this topic


Solomon Eagle

Recommended Posts

Is there evidence for the popular claim that man's scientific knowledge and therefore, technolgy, have accelerated geometrically over his history? Is it a theory that fits the facts?

I would say no. The Dark Ages was a period where the brakes were put on, at least in the Western world. Scientific knowledge is very dependent on dominant epistemology, and technology depends heavily on politics (free market capitalism accelerates technological advances because capital is free to flow into interesting ventures)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there evidence for the popular claim that man's scientific knowledge and therefore, technolgy, have accelerated geometrically over his history? Is it a theory that fits the facts?

Don't you mean exponentially? If not then I'm not sure what you are asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For t being time...

geometrically means going as t^n for some number n

exponentially means going as n^t for some number n

So geometric growth is slower than exponential growth.

There is no evidence for any real growth in "knowledge" until you tell me how you measure it. There was progress in agriculture, architecture, metalurgy during the "dark ages", so there was progress. There wasn't as much of what we would think of as "scientific" and "philosophical" progress. That is to say much progress was made in practical fields during the "dark ages", but less progress in more academic areas.

The main reason people think that the "dark ages" were a lull in progress is that they compare progress over the entire Roman Empire to progress in Northern Europe in the "dark ages." Most of the progress in the Roman Empire was occurring in the eastern part of the empire (Greece and Egypt). This part was part of the Byzantine empire and then part of the Islamic world, so got isolated from the west for cultural reasons. Most of the western part was a rural/agricultural backwater. If you actually lived through the Roman Empire and up to the Renaissance in Northern Europe you would note continual progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there evidence for the popular claim that man's scientific knowledge and therefore, technolgy, have accelerated geometrically over his history? Is it a theory that fits the facts?

Due to the huge technological advancements over the last 100 years or so, it is easy to visualize it as a geometric or exponential. But technological advancement is a very difficult thing to quantify; therefore it would be hard to accurately model mathematically.

In addition, technological advancements do not always directly correlate with the scientific knowledge it is based on. A lot of recent technological advances are based on scientific knowledge that was defined 100s of years ago (for example, Newton's laws).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In addition, technological advancements do not always directly correlate with the scientific knowledge it is based on.  A lot of recent technological advances are based on scientific knowledge that was defined 100s of years ago (for example, Newton's laws).

Do you have a few examples of these "recent technological advances?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, P, for making clear to me the difference between a "geometrical" and an "exponential" progression. And you guessed right, I did mean exponential. This popular idea is little more than a strong intuition, then, at best. The reasoning usually goes, as I'm sure you know, scientific knowledge tends to get you newer and more powerful technology which, in turn, is a tool which gets you more scientific knowledge, and faster, and

so on. A snowball effect. Seems so commonsensical, but I see that a proper understanding of all the variables involved, or even what the true variables involved are, is beyond the logical reach of simple common sense. Thanks again! Solomon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My best introduction to the theory that technology improves exponentially came from the book "The Age of Spiritual Machines" by Ray Kurzweil. Although I was interested in the theory at the time, eventually I found there to be irreconcilable difficulties in it. Technology does not at a constant rate. The nearest example is the Industrial Revolution; commentators on today's technology observe that only in recent years it has approached the rate of progress that was experienced during the IR.

And more ancient history proves this as well. The claim that Western Roman Empire was just as primitive as the tribal barbarian society that replaced it, is utterly ridiculous and devoid of facts. For proof, I suggest any book on ancient Britain, during Roman occupation and afterwards. By all accounts the Roman withdrawal from Britain was a disaster of catastrophic proportions. All technology receded nearly back into Stone Age, the famous Roman roads became neglected, use of bricks for buildings was gone, and a genocide by the Picts and the Saxons obliterated native Britons nearly into extinction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason people think that the "dark ages" were a lull in progress is that they compare progress over the entire Roman Empire to progress in Northern Europe in the "dark ages."  Most of the progress in the Roman Empire was occurring in the eastern part of the empire (Greece and Egypt).  This part was part of the Byzantine empire and then part of the Islamic world, so got isolated from the west for cultural reasons.  Most of the western part was a rural/agricultural backwater.  If you actually lived through the Roman Empire and up to the Renaissance in Northern Europe you would note continual progress.

Punk,

This thread is still in the "brush-clearing" stage. So, I would like to offer a few suggestions as targets, and ask a few questions.

The subject of this thread is technological and scientific knowledge. So, "progress" means an advance in specialized knowledge of the arts of making things (technology) and in specialized, systematized, and causally understood knowledge of the physical nature of the world (science).

There are various ways of measuring that knowledge. Examples are the number of things a given population makes or understands in nature. This is measurement by enumeration. (Yes, this brings up lots of complexities, but for now we should set that aside or we will never get to the heart of this discussion.)

An illustration of the former, technology, from the stone-tool era would be this: a group of people in central Italy at a certain time -- 50,000 years ago? -- might know how to make one stone tool: a hand ax. A little later the descendents of those people figure out how to make not only stone axes but also awls and spearpoints. Their technological knowledge has tripled in this area of technology. They have three times as many products and presumably at least three times as many techniques for making stone tools, although there will be overlap and synergy.

With that as a provisionally simple example, I would like to ask a question. Let's take an example of one place that has a continuous history for the last 2600 years or so: Rome (the villages, the walled town, and then walled city).

Now with those particular time and place "coordinates" in mind, are you saying that there was no loss of technology -- measured either by number of kinds of products or by ideas in the minds of the populace about technical processes -- from the year 14 CE, for example, to the year 650 CE?

P. S. -- You mentioned "Northern Europe," but that area by definition was largely outside the Roman Empire, though not its sphere of influence, right? The vast migrations through that region make it difficult to examine for this subject because there are so many variables. Instead, I have tried to pick one spot, Rome, that has a continuous history that many in this forum will know to some extent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Northern Europe includes France, Great Britain and the Low Countries which were all in the Empire (okay only the Southern half of Great Britain).

Since I am assuming that most people here are urban in background, I think they tend to consider more theoretical modes of knowing to more practical progress.

That is, advances in areas such as agriculture or animal husbandry tend to be neglected. There was a time when breeding a really good variety of cow was tremendous human progress, and did more for people than some piece of sexy science like astronomy.

Somewhere around here there was a thread about the "greatest civilization". The one I noted was left out was the ancient Mesopotamian civilization which tamed and bred the varieties of plants and animals that make farming in the modern understanding possible. In fact most of the plants and animals westerners associate with farming derive from Mesopotamia.

"Dark Age" Europe continued to make progress in these areas as well as architecture (or how did they suddenly start building those cathedrals?).

Also I don't believe the Britons were wiped out by the invading Germanic tribes, some fled, but most stayed and became subjects to the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. Modern English have Celtic blood just as do modern French (the Franks didn't wipe out the locals either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...