#joseph needham

[its-a-date]

Joseph Needham held that Chinese physicians had developed inoculation as early as the eleventh century; in his view, it was closely guarded as a sort of trade secret for centuries.

"Plagues Upon the Earth: Disease and the Course of Human History" - Kyle Harper

[twinkl22004]

Lu Gwei-Djen & Joseph Needham, “Celestial Lancets”, 1980, PART TWO (II).

  Here I present: Lu Gwei-Djen & Joseph Needham, “Celestial Lancets: History & Rationale of Acupuncture & Moxa”, 1980, PART TWO (II).INTRODUCTION.Eidonomy is the scientific study of the visible exterior parts of living things. It contrasts, with anatomy, which deals with the unseen structures within a living body.  Eidonomy is what acupuncture is: the scientific study of the visible exterior…

Lu Gwei-Djen & Joseph Needham, “Celestial Lancets”, 1980, PART TWO (II).

[tenth-sentence]

Needham had no training in languages or history, but he did have one of the sharpest, quirkiest minds in a university famous for both.

"Why the West Rules – For Now: The patterns of history and what they reveal about the future" - Ian Morris

[sinoeurovoices]

中國的經濟奇蹟　應歸功於市場力量和私企

馬德斌（Debin Ma）牛津大學經濟史教授, 牛津萬靈學院院士 當全世界都在努力應對中國國內不太妙轉變造成的影響時，麻省理工學院經濟學家黃亞生（一位長期敏銳觀察中國經濟的學者）適時出版了新書《EAST的起落》（The Rise and Fall of the EAST: How Exams, Autocracy, Stability, and Technology Brought China Success, and Why They Might Lead to Its…

View On WordPress

[tenth-sentence]

Despite Needham's comments, and Pincus's research, Brave New World and other books of this period about biological futures were still more often taken as distant prophecies than as suggestions of immediate prospects.

"Frankenstein's Footsteps: Science, Genetics and Popular Culture" - Jon Turney

[tenth-sentence]

He suggested that those who found Huxley's vision distasteful would say that the biology must be wrong.

"Frankenstein's Footsteps: Science, Genetics and Popular Culture" - Jon Turney

[peterfritzwalter]

The Genius of China The Genius of China, by Robert Temple and Joseph Needham, London: André Deutsch, 2007

[principleofplenitude]

But let’s skip past the opening chapters to the core of the argument. Mokyr’s claim is that the West was uniquely placed to enter on an extended period of scientific, technological and industrial progress because of three factors: a respect for useful knowledge (Bacon being the “cultural entrepreneur” who was most important in inculcating this outlook); the division of Western Europe into competing states, each of which had to try to improve on its competitors and no one of which was capable of imposing a stultifying intellectual conformity; and lastly, the emergence in the late 17th century of a transnational “republic of letters” through which intellectuals exchanged information and co-operated to advance useful knowledge. These three factors made the industrial revolution possible. They are the cause of the great divergence. But let’s skip past the opening chapters to the core of the argument. Mokyr’s claim is that the West was uniquely placed to enter on an extended period of scientific, technological and industrial progress because of three factors: a respect for useful knowledge (Bacon being the “cultural entrepreneur” who was most important in inculcating this outlook); the division of Western Europe into competing states, each of which had to try to improve on its competitors and no one of which was capable of imposing a stultifying intellectual conformity; and lastly, the emergence in the late 17th century of a transnational “republic of letters” through which intellectuals exchanged information and co-operated to advance useful knowledge. These three factors made the industrial revolution possible. They are the cause of the great divergence. Thus Mokyr’s three conditions are not sufficient. You also need a culture of discovery and of facticity to make sustained progress. You need, in addition, an understanding of the power of experimentation. You need a step change in the exchange of information which printing made possible. And you need luck or contingency: the conceptual foundations of the steam engine were laid by intellectuals keen to prove that Aristotle was wrong when he denied the possibility of a vacuum; without Aristotle no Boyle’s law. It is the absence of a comparable challenge that held back progress in medical therapeutics.

“How the West Invented Itself” from Standpoint Magazine