aronnax said:Since Selim I conquered Egypt and Hejaz, the Ottomans were practically, Islam's most powerful empire and leading state and representative. Given that there were also the most 'advanced'/'Europeanised' Islamic state for four centuries, I think it is fair to use the Ottomans as a general representation of Islamic Scientific thinking.
+1 point.
aronnax said:The point of that paragraph was to show that the general Islamic world view was against learning from who they deemed as barbarians and that this world view, even after centuries of political changes, changed very little. Western Europeans may have seen the Muslim as barbarians too
+1 point.
aronnax said:But not vice-versa. The Quran, for example was already translated and reprinted in large numbers to be sold in the Ottoman Empire by the 16th century.
The Old Testament and New Testament have been in full Arabic translations since at least ~1000AD.
aronnax said:By the 16th century, European Universities, such as Cambridge and Oxford, Salamanca that had departments for the study of Arabic and Oriental cultures.
Again, the same cannot be said for the Ottoman Empire, much less, the rest of the Islamic Middle East. And this was because Islamic societies were less willing to engage with Europeans than Europeans were with Islamic societies.
Considering that the Ottoman Empire didn't have European Universities I don't see how this matters? But I'm sure if I looked I'd find that the Ottomans had a programme or department, however informal, that dealt with Western affairs. And if that involved hiring Westerners, or Christians, to do it; so be it, that's a policy choice, and a sensible one, and not an intrinsic cultural or religious failing.
aronnax said:Are you saying that the rejection of the printing press by the elite courts of Europeans were on the same par as the rejection of the printing press by the Ottoman or Moroccan courts? Of course not. European learning was spurred on by the printing press because of nice cheap books and reprints. Islamic society did not have the same privileged having outright refused them for centuries on end.
I'm saying that Europe, and I acknowledge I'm speaking in general terms, was as wary of the printed word as any Islamic nation; not least because of the lessons of the Reformation, a print based Revolution. At its most extreme it could be every bit as restrictive: witness the Index Librorum Prohibitorum . But there's another point that needs it seems to be made again, Islamic society =/ the Ottoman Empire.
aronnax said:And you didn't attack the main crux of my argument. The quote by Nicholas de Nocolay that summed up my argument about how the Ottomans only learned to use European inventions and warfare via immigrants who have moved into Turkey and not directly just send diplomats/officials/students whatever to said lands to learn.
Because it's no different to what happened in Europe. The French bought Venetian glass, dyers and silk-weavers to France to begin those industries domestically. Conversely, when the Edict of Nantes was revoked, French Huguenots took out of France specialised skills involved in the production of high quality clocks, glass and porcelain. Yet we don't criticise Europeans for not just sending students to learn what amounted to state secrets; instead we criticise the Ottomans for not being stupid.
The rest of the post can be summed up as: Ottomans =/ Muslims.