Why Did Modern Science Not Develop in Civilization X?

Abstract

The question, Why did modern science not develop in civilization X? is generally entertained seriously only with regard to civilizations like the Arabic, Chinese, and Indian, which in other respects—religion, the arts, and literature and, to an extent, philosophy—are considered to have progressed and achieved as much as the West.1 It does not occur to anyone to ask, say, Why did Christianity not develop in China, or Renaissance representational art in India? In religion and the arts we do not expect culture-neutral constructions. But since the same science is taught everywhere, and scientific knowledge is perceived as universal and cosmopolitan, it seems to make sense to ask why it failed to develop in a particular civilization. Behind the question, therefore, lies the assumption that modern science is the only science possible and could only have developed in the way it did. Thus it seems reasonable to inquire why it failed to develop in civilizations outside Europe that, in most other respects, were at least as advanced as Europe at the time of its birth. Behind the question often lies the unspoken presumption that modern science did not develop through a dialogue with non-Western traditions of science. Were it acknowledged that such dialogue contributed to both the birth and growth of modern science, and that contemporary science grew by standing on the shoulders of earlier non-European traditions, the question would seem pointless.