Earth if no Dark Ages?

[D Toccs]

Not entirely true. Europe was far beyond other civilizations for a long time; the dark ages allowed the rest of the world to catch up quite a bit. If Europe had no dark ages, we would be several hundred years more advanced by now.

Not true at all.

At the time of the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 450 AD and the start of the Dark Ages for Western Europe, the Eastern Roman Empire which contained Greece and the Middle East was already much more advanced culturally, scientifically and economically.

The Eastern Roman Empire continued on unimpeded by any dark ages until the 1500s and developed things like the basis for modern mathematics, chemistry and philosophy.
Asian civilizations like China, Japan, Korea and India all continued to flourish.

To think that we would be more advanced now if Western Europe had not had the Dark Ages is to take a very Western-centric view of history and in this case is completely wrong.

[Gollumpus]

Would we be more advanced if there was no Dark Ages in Europe? Sure. We would also likely be even more advanced if there had not been various purges of whole areas of learning in China due to changes of philosophies or the whims of a new emperor.

We are either a very dumb race for not learning from our past mistakes or a very bright one for being able to overcome ourselves.

regards,
G.

[FennerMachine]

Can someone make the math, can a society started by 60 odd people reach 1 million in 2000 years?

Easily - worked it our assuming everyone pairs up, having average of 3 children each who also pair up. Each generation lasting 30 year before next wave of children.
The number is HUGE! Billions possible in that time frame.

[spaceship]

A lot of scientific progress was made in the Middle East during the European dark ages. Two scientists of note:

Al Khwarizmi: Called the father of algebra. You can read about his many contributions to science online. But one thing I'd like to mention is that basis of all computer software is something called the algorithm which is a concept Al Khwarizmi came up with. Algorithm is actually a latin corruption of his name.

ibn al-Haytham: Know as the father of optics. He also came up with the scientific method which is the basis of all scientific research even today.

So to say that the world didn't progress during the dark ages is completely untrue. It ignores the works of great scientists and mathematicians of the middle east and east asia whose contributions are still relevant today.

[The_Asgard_live]

Not true at all.

At the time of the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 450 AD and the start of the Dark Ages for Western Europe, the Eastern Roman Empire which contained Greece and the Middle East was already much more advanced culturally, scientifically and economically.

The Eastern Roman Empire continued on unimpeded by any dark ages until the 1500s and developed things like the basis for modern mathematics, chemistry and philosophy.
Asian civilizations like China, Japan, Korea and India all continued to flourish.

To think that we would be more advanced now if Western Europe had not had the Dark Ages is to take a very Western-centric view of history and in this case is completely wrong.

D Toccs,

Since you seem well verse in the subject, maybe I can pick your brain a bit. Would you agree that it is not as simple as saying we would be more advanced or we would not be?

To take a "western-centric" view of history, is to take the view of history of the region that pulled together all the ideas that have led to the most advanced societies we have today. So, if someone is going to talk about how much further advanced humanity would be, what we are really saying is how much further the west would be? Otherwise, we'd have to concede that strict logic says Africa would have the hyper drives now, because that is where we think it all began. Actually, some sort of intelligent fish humanoid should have that honor.

Its been a while, but didn't the western notion of linear time, linear thinking, lead to its linear progress? I remember being impressed by the concept when introduced to it. That the east had a circular reasoning that would basically keep certain cultures stuck in their traditions and way of thinking...

If one could start the age of enlightenment hundreds of years sooner, logic would dictate, we'd be hundreds of years more advanced. But its not that simple. As they say, necessity is the mother of invention. So is war, or cold wars. Things happened the way they had to happen for us to get to where we are. Without a race to space, or nuclear build up etc...

If we could simply cut out 500-700 years of darkness and start the history we know sooner, sure, we'd be 500-700 more advanced. However, if we starting changing events that had to happen to drive innovation... who knows what would have happened.

[Galileo_Galilee]

Yes, I fully believe that we'd have a much higher level of technology if things like religion and the Inquisition had never happened.

Religious oppression caused huge gaps in technology and still does in some places ion this planet.

[Phenom]

The Dark Ages only effected Western Europe.
For those 600 years all scientific and cultural progress continued in Greece and the Middle East which were already more advanced than the West. It is progress from those areas that forms the basis for modern Western civilization.
Asian countries were completely unaffected by the Dark Ages, China, Japan, Korea and India all continued to progress.

It is a myth that we would be so much more advanced if the Dark Ages did not occur, they were an incredibly localized event.

The middle east were still riding camels until they struck oil. Hardly much to trouble the scientists there.

Greece peaked about 2000 years go. Since then all they have perfected is corruption and greed.

The Asian countries are so notoriously insular that they pretty much got stuck in a cultural loop and sure, they did progress in some areas, but the lack of information sharing made any progression beyond those earlier discoveries impossible.

It is quite obsurd to think that without the dark ages, we would not be further along than we are now. But congratulations, you are the first person I have ever heard say that. Some points for being creative I guess.

[Nth Chevron]

well if we werent dominated by religion when science came to the forefront of our understanding and priorities, then i suspect we would have embraced science like the Alterans.

Instead we get fairytales for grownups, that instill a culture with fear, mass murder and other atrocities, not to mention its has been used many times for the wrong people to claim power.

N.C

[ju2au]

Other countries/cultures also had their dark ages. For example, during the reign of China's first emperor, books were burned and scholars were executed. The emperor figured that the people most likely to plot against him are those who can read and write so getting rid of them should solve that problem.

[D Toccs]

The middle east were still riding camels until they struck oil. Hardly much to trouble the scientists there.

Greece peaked about 2000 years go. Since then all they have perfected is corruption and greed.

The Asian countries are so notoriously insular that they pretty much got stuck in a cultural loop and sure, they did progress in some areas, but the lack of information sharing made any progression beyond those earlier discoveries impossible.

It is quite obsurd to think that without the dark ages, we would not be further along than we are now. But congratulations, you are the first person I have ever heard say that. Some points for being creative I guess.

Your post is so disturbingly ignorant of world history that to correct all of your errors would take far too long. If you're not going to contribute in a productive manner, please just leave those of us who are trying to have an intelligent discussion.

[Nth Chevron]

I dont quite think the rant is to do with world history.

More like a mini rant against religion that held us back when we could possibly be out amongst the stars ourselves by now.

Not a definite outcome for sure, but religion has always been the antithesis of science.

N.C

[Kaiphantom]

Not true at all.

At the time of the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 450 AD and the start of the Dark Ages for Western Europe, the Eastern Roman Empire which contained Greece and the Middle East was already much more advanced culturally, scientifically and economically.

The Eastern Roman Empire continued on unimpeded by any dark ages until the 1500s and developed things like the basis for modern mathematics, chemistry and philosophy.
Asian civilizations like China, Japan, Korea and India all continued to flourish.

To think that we would be more advanced now if Western Europe had not had the Dark Ages is to take a very Western-centric view of history and in this case is completely wrong.

Question for you: what kind of nations dominate the world today? Is there any kind of relation between those countries and the Dark Ages?

I'll answer for you: Western countries. Europe (and the US which was settled by Europe). Despite the Dark Ages, you can see who came out on top. Now, imagine how far we'd be along today if the Dark Ages didn't happen?

[D Toccs]

D Toccs,

Since you seem well verse in the subject, maybe I can pick your brain a bit. Would you agree that it is not as simple as saying we would be more advanced or we would not be?

Yes I would completely agree that it is not as simple as saying "we would" or "would not" be more advanced without the Dark Ages.

There were so many mitigating factors that caused the Dark Ages, that to remove any one factor would result in a drastically different world then we have today, and not necessarily a better or more advanced world.

Its been a while, but didn't the western notion of linear time, linear thinking, lead to its linear progress? I remember being impressed by the concept when introduced to it. That the east had a circular reasoning that would basically keep certain cultures stuck in their traditions and way of thinking...

Yeah the concept of linear time was originated in the West, I think by Newton.

The concept of linear progress in relation to history and civilization is a contested point among historians and archaeologists however.

Civilization's progress is not a simple as moving from primitive to advanced in one continuous line of progress. It's more of a rise and fall.

If one could start the age of enlightenment hundreds of years sooner, logic would dictate, we'd be hundreds of years more advanced. But its not that simple. As they say, necessity is the mother of invention. So is war, or cold wars. Things happened the way they had to happen for us to get to where we are. Without a race to space, or nuclear build up etc...

If we could simply cut out 500-700 years of darkness and start the history we know sooner, sure, we'd be 500-700 more advanced. However, if we starting changing events that had to happen to drive innovation... who knows what would have happened.

Yes this is exactly the point. In theory if you could just cut out the 600 or 700 years of the Dark Ages from Western Europe and start the Renaissance earlier, then sure we would be more advanced.

But to cut out the Dark Ages, it would necessitate that you remove the various factors that caused them such as the Hunnic invasion, the migration of Germanic and Slavic peoples, the spread of Christianity and the division of the Roman Empire.

Once you remove those factors then there is no way of saying what would happen, because you are essentially re-writing everything. The world could easily be 100s of years less advanced without all of those events happening.

[Phenom]

Your post is so disturbingly ignorant of world history that to correct all of your errors would take far too long. If you're not going to contribute in a productive manner, please just leave those of us who are trying to have an intelligent discussion.

Nice deflection.

Guess you don't like being called on your comments. Fair enough. Not everyone likes confrontation.

[Daralundy]

We might not be what we are without the "dark ages". It was actually a time of great growth and change. In it the old graeco-roman civilization, the northern barbarians, and christianity merged to produce something new.

Question for you: what kind of nations dominate the world today? Is there any kind of relation between those countries and the Dark Ages?

I'll answer for you: Western countries. Europe (and the US which was settled by Europe). Despite the Dark Ages, you can see who came out on top. Now, imagine how far we'd be along today if the Dark Ages didn't happen?