网帖翻译

Susanna Viljanen
Because China lacked the Required Secondary Powers.
The required secondary powers in this case were
religion which distinguishes between mysticism and philosophy
discovering the connection between mathematics, philosophy and engineering
discovery of the scientific method
applying sciences and mathematics on engineering
developing a philosophy which enables capitalism to evolve instead of economy remaining as bazaar economy
developing a judicial theory and jurisprudence based either on civil code, common law or customary law and developing the principle of the rule of law
China never made the distinction between mysticism and philosophy. There never were Chinese Empidocles, Parmenides, Thales, Aristoteles, Platon, Socrates or Democritos.

因为中国欠缺必要的次级力量。在这种情况下必要的次级力量是：
宗教区分了神秘主义和哲学；
发现数学、哲学和工程之间的联系；
科学方法的发现；
在工程上应用科学和数学；
发展一种哲学，使资本主义得以发展，而不是让经济停留在市场经济的状态；
发展以民法典、普通法或习惯法为基础的司法理论和法理学，发展法治原则。
中国从来没有把神秘主义和哲学区分开来。从来没有中国的恩培多克勒（古希腊哲学家）, 巴门尼德（前苏格拉底时期哲学家）, 泰利斯（希腊哲学家）, 亚里士多德, 柏拉图, 苏格拉底（古希腊哲学家）或德谟克利特（古希腊哲学家）。

As result, there also never were natural philosophers such as Archimedes, Apollonios, Heron or Diophantos, who would use mathematics on resolving philosophical problems and proving concepts - such as that Earth is a ball. The Chinese believed well until the 17th century that Earth is flat.
Without those powers you really do not develop the scientific method either, which means engineering does not become a science - it will remain as an art and tinkering based on trial and error.
Sciences and mathematics can also be applied on economy, and China never developed Capitalism. The Chinese economy was more developed than that in Arabic countries or Russia, but they never developed the true Capitalism.
China has never had a similar tradition of law, jurisprudence and judicial science as the Romans did. There never was Chinese Lex XII Tabulae nor Corpus Iuris Civilis in China. Which meant there never was the rule of law and clear system of justice, but the Emperors were more or less despots and their whim was the law. This is an especially crucial situation with contracts, individual judicial safety and safety of property and ownership.
The technological weaknesses were that China did not have glass, mechanical clocks, phonetic scxt and corning of the gunpowder.

因此，也没有像阿基米德、阿波罗尼奥斯、赫伦或丢凡托斯这样的自然哲学家，他们会用数学来解决哲学问题和证明概念——比如地球是一个球。中国人直到17世纪才相信地球是圆的。
如果没有这些能力，你也无法真正发展出科学的方法，这意味着工程学不会成为一门科学——它仍将是一门艺术，是建立在反复试验的基础上进行修补。
科学和数学也可以应用在经济上，中国从来没有发展过资本主义。中国经济曾比阿拉伯国家或俄罗斯更发达，但他们从未发展出真正的资本主义。
中国在法律传统、法律体系和司法科学方面从来没有罗马人那样的传统。中国从来没有中国版的《十二铜表法》，也没有中国版的《罗马法/民法大全》。
（十二铜表法，又称十二表法，是古罗马在约前450年制定的法律，因为刻在12块铜牌（也有说为着色的木牌）上，故而得名。十二铜表法被认为是现今“成文法”的始祖，也是欧陆法系中的“罗马法”的源头之一。）
中国在技术上的弱点是，没有玻璃、机械钟、音标和火药的进一步发展。

Lack of glass meant no decent windows, no decent glassware, no lenses, no chemical instruments and vessels and no scientific instruments. It was an unovercomeable obstacle for sciences.
Lack of mechanical clocks meant there was no way of determining time accurately and independently of gravity. It meant also that bluewater navigation was next to impossible. The Chinese had marvellous ships, but they were bound to littoral navigation as the Chinese did not a) understand Earth is a sphere and b) had no instrumentation nor concepts for oceanic navigation.
The Chinese had compass, but they used it on religious rituals and feng shui rather than geographic exploration and navigation at sea. They never understood the connection between trigonometry, time and navigation and they never divided the compass rose on 360 degrees.
The Chinese had magnificient large ships, but they were not ocean-going. The Chinese did not understand Earth is a ball - and never developed celestial navigation. Going to the ocean without bluewater navigation skills is tantamount to suicide. Zheng He made his voyages by littoral, not oceanic, navigation.

没有玻璃意味着没有像样的窗户，没有像样的玻璃器皿，没有镜片，没有化学仪器和容器，没有科学仪器。这对科学来说是一个无法克服的障碍。
没有机械时钟意味着没有办法独立于重力精确地确定时间。这也意味着在蓝海航行几乎是不可能的。中国人有了不起的船只，但他们注定只能进行沿海航行，因为中国人不知道 a)地球是一个球体；b)没有海洋航行的仪器和概念。
中国人有指南针，但他们把它用于宗教仪式和风水，而不是地理探索和海上航行。他们从来都不明白三角学、时间和航海之间的联系，他们也从来没把360度和罗盘区分开。
中国人有宏伟的大船，但他们不是远洋的。中国人不知道地球是一个球，也从未发展过天体导航。没有航海技能就去海洋就等于自杀。郑和的航行是沿海航行，而不是远洋航行。

The Chinese had paper and printing press - and 40,000 hanzi characters. While they are beautiful and can carry enormous information on mere sight, they are basically hieroglyphs and illegible unless you know how they are pronounced and what they mean. Before the universal literacy and computers, the printing press was next to useless - it simply took too much time to cast the characters and arrange them for prints, and literacy was not widespread. Had China adopted a phonetic scxt such as the Mongol scxt, the Japanese katakana and hiragana, or Korean Hangul, the printing press would have become a much more powerful device on spreading information and new ideas instead of just recording the classics.
The Chinese had gunpowder, but corning of the gunpowder is a German 14th century innovation. Without corning the gunpowder, it becomes merely a poof powder, and much more a psychological weapon and an incendiary rather than a projectile propellant or explosive. Corning of the gunpowder improves its efficiency eightfold and enables building decent bombards, cannons and arquebuses.
There was also a grand paradigmatic difference in philosophy between the European and the Chinese thinkers. In China, the thoughts of Meng Zi, Kong Fuzi and Lao Zi prevailed, and the goal of Kong Fuzi was to seek harmony and balance, i.e. don’t rock the boat. In the Chinese tradition, dissidence is poorly tolerated, which leads into a stable society, but it also leads into a societal ossification and also leads easily in the “not invented here” mindset

中国人有纸和印刷机，还有4万个汉字。虽然它们很漂亮，而且仅凭一瞥就能承载大量信息，但它们基本上是象形文字，难以辨认，除非你知道它们是如何发音的，它们的意思是什么。在普遍识字和计算机出现之前，印刷机几乎是无用的——它花了太多的时间来塑造汉字并印刷，而且识字并不普遍。如果中国采用了蒙古文、日本片假名、平假名等注音文字或韩文，印刷术将不再只是记录经典，而是成为传播信息和新思想的有力工具。
中国人有火药，但火药的进一步发展是德国14世纪的发明。没有了火药的进一步发展，它只是一种粉末，更像是一种心理武器和燃烧弹，而不是抛射推进剂或炸药。

The Europeans tend to be more extroverted in this case. It is said the Europeans have not even today agreed what is the best societal model there is. European share the Graeco-Jewish-Roman tradition of the big debate and open disputations in the square, in the university, in the school and, disagreement and challenging the status quo. There is a sarcasm three Jews, four opinions, and the gemara of the Talmud is a hallmark of this debate. Europeans were aware they were not alone, and also far more open to the rest of the world. They knew they were not superior, and they were constantly under attack - the seaborne barbarians in North, the horse nomads in the East, Islam from South - and there was a vast ocean in the West. In order not to get crushed, they were willing to learn from foreigners and carry their ideas and innovations even further - such as corning of the gunpowder and breech-loading cannons, which were known already in the 15th century.

在这种情况下，欧洲人倾向于更加外向。据说，直到今天，欧洲人还没有就最好的社会模式达成一致。欧洲人继承了希腊-犹太-罗马的传统，在广场上，在大学里，在学校里进行大辩论和公开辩论，反对和挑战现状。
有一个讽刺——三个犹太人，四个观点，塔木德法典的注释本是这场辩论的一个特点。欧洲人意识到他们并不孤单，而且对世界其他地方也更加开放。他们知道自己并不优越，而且他们经常受到攻击——北方是海上的野蛮人，东方是游牧民族，南方是伊斯兰教——而西方是一片广阔的海洋。为了不被击垮，他们愿意向外国人学习，并将他们的思想和创新进一步发扬光大，比如火药的进一步发展和15世纪就已经知道的后装弹大炮。

Say what we want of the Xinhai Revolution of 1911, it really kicked the sleeping dragon awake. What the Chinese are not is that they are not stupid. Both Chinas - the mainland Zhongguo and island Taiwan - did a quick self-analysis and analyzed what has gone wrong - and absorbed the Western knowledge, science and thinking patterns quickly - and gained those required secondary powers.
Both mainland China under Communism and Taiwan under People’s Three Principles are hallmarks on how an ossified and dormant civilization wakes up, renews itself, absorbs knowledge and education - and take the place which really belongs to them.

说到辛亥革命，它真把沉睡的龙踢醒了。中国人不愚蠢。无论哪个中国——中国大陆还是中国台湾——都快速进行过自我分析，分析了哪里出了问题，并迅速吸收了西方的知识、科学和思维模式，获得了所需的次要力量。
无论是共产主义统治下的中国大陆，还是人民三民主义统治下的台湾，都标志着一个僵化和休眠的文明的觉醒、自我更新、吸收知识和教育，并占据真正属于他们的位置。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Steve Anderson
Do you think the absence of regional rivals played a part? While you make excellent points, I am more of a school of thought that China’s dynastic cycle and lack of consistent regional rivals led to technological and institutional stagnation.

你是否认为地区竞争对手的欠缺起到了一定作用?
虽然你的观点很好，但我更倾向于认为，中国的王朝周期和缺乏持续的地区竞争对手，导致了技术和制度上的停滞。

Susanna Viljanen
Yes, and it is basic cultural evolution. The lack of rivals - both external and internal - tend to ossify the society and lull it into a state of complacent stagnation.
It is the same in biological evolution - species who have lived in isolation are helpless against invasive species.

是的，这是文化进化的基本。缺乏外部和内部竞争对手，往往会使社会僵化，陷入自满的停滞状态。
在生物进化中也是如此——在孤立环境中生活的物种对入侵物种是无能为力的。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Michal Šturc
I agree here, Europeans had to either adapt and improve, or be beaten by those who did.

在这一点上我同意，欧洲人必须要么适应和改进，要么被那些做到了的人打败。

Su Chao
I disagree with your first two bullets while agreeing with the rest.
The observation isn’t uniquely true to China. Rather, it was Europe that blew away the competition when it entered the Age of Enlightenment.
The bulk of the Classical Chinese philosophies came about the same period as the Greeks’ in the 6th - 3rd century BC. The cross comparison between the two are roughly equivalent. For each of the names you mentioned above, there was a similar Classical Chinese philosopher to match. There had been exhaustive academic papers on this subject. However, it is worthy to point out that there was no equivalent to λογική in ancient China. Logic, was introduced to the Chinese scholars by the Jesuits in the 16th century AD.

我不同意你的前两个观点，但我同意其余部分。
并非只有中国才如此。相反，是欧洲在进入启蒙时代时才击败了竞争对手。
中国古典哲学的大部分产生于公元前6 - 3世纪，与希腊相当，两者之间的交叉比较大致相当。对于你上面提到的每一个名字，都有一个相似的中国古典哲学家来匹配。关于这个问题已有详尽的学术论文。然而，值得指出的是，在中国古代并没有什么“λογικ b”。逻辑学，是在公元16世纪由耶稣会士引入给中国学者的。

To counter some of your generalization, for example, there was Zu Chongzhi - Wikipedia, who approximated the value of Pi to 7th decimal point in 5th century AD, 800 years ahead of the competition. The earth was proved to be curved in the 7th century AD during the Tang Dynasty and there were hypotheses that the earth could be a ball.
Innovations in mathematics and engineering were sporadic, not systemic in ancient China, like everywhere else in the world. If it wasn’t the Renaissance, the Classical Greek philosophies would have been buried away in the European history.
Thus, the real question was why the Age of Enlightenment only happened in Europe, but not in Mesopotamia, Nile Delta, Indus Valley, Yellow River Valley, or Mesoamerica.

为了反驳你的一些概括——例如，祖冲之，他在公元5世纪将圆周率的值近似到小数点后7位，领先竞争对手800年。在公元7世纪的唐朝，地球被证明是弯曲的，并有假说认为地球可能是一个球。
和世界上其他地方一样，中国古代在数学和工程方面的创新是零星的，不是系统性的。如果不是文艺复兴时期，古典希腊哲学早就湮没在欧洲历史中了。
因此，真正的问题是，为什么启蒙时代只发生在欧洲，而不是在美索不达米亚、尼罗河三角洲、印度河流域、黄河流域或中美洲。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Dmitry Kosh
Thus, the real question was why the Age of Enlightenment only happened in Europe,
Perhaps it is because Christian monotheistic theology allowed Europeans to develop a mechanistic and progressive outlook on the world - without falling into the trap of Islamic occasionalism:
Christianity and the rise of western science
Do Chinese of the previous ages believe in linear (progressive) development of the universe or cyclical one -like Hindus? Do they have some sort of supreme deity, which allows the world to work as a designed mechanism, governed by universal laws?

“因此，真正的问题是，为什么启蒙时代只发生在欧洲，而不是在美索不达米亚、尼罗河三角洲、印度河流域、黄河流域或中美洲。”
也许是因为基督教一神论神学允许欧洲人发展出一种机械的、进步的世界观，而没有落入伊斯兰偶发主义的陷阱:链接——《基督教和西方科学的兴起》
以前的中国人是相信普世的线性(渐进)发展还是像印度人相信的循环发展? 他们是否有某种至高无上的神，允许世界作为一个设计好的机制运作，受普遍法则支配?

Su Chao
Christianity as a probable cause is one of the theories. Yet, you cannot exclude exceptions such as the Islamic Golden Age where ideas such as scientific method and algebra were first born. Or, at least we should agree that the Renaissance is not unique across the civilizations of the world. But the Age of Enlightenment certainly is.
I personally lean towards the theory that the unique combination of geography, politics and the Catholic Church (not Christianity the religion) played a larger role. A very long coastline, a highly fragmented feudal system and a common Christian identity, together, gave birth to a “healthy competition”.

基督教可能是原因之一。但是，也不能排除伊斯兰黄金时代的科学方法、代数等概念的诞生。或者，至少我们应该同意，文艺复兴并不是世界文明中的独特现象。不过启蒙时代确实独特。
我个人倾向于这样一种理论，即地理、政治和天主教会(而非基督教)的独特结合发挥了更大的作用。漫长的海岸线，高度分散的封建体系和共同的基督教身份，共同孕育了“健康的竞争”。

In a “healthy competition”: 1, many players of different sizes; 2, at any tier, there are more than 2 players; 3, it is difficult to drive a player out of the game; 4, if a player is driven out of the competition, a replacement should appear, without damaging the total dynamics; 5, a credible external threat that prevents the game from implosion (i.e. the Ottoman).
In a “healthy competition” between the states, states compete in both soft and hard power where arts and literature could blossom. In a “bad competition” when states could conquer each other, they focus on hard power.
The Greek City States were in a healthy competition before the Peloponnesian War. The Spring Autumn Period in China was a healthy competition.

在“健康的竞争”中:
1.许多不同规模的玩家;
2.在任何层面都有超过2名玩家；
3.很难将其中一名玩家驱逐出去；
4. 如果一名玩家被逐出了竞争，那么应该在不破坏整体动态的情况下出现一个替换者;
5. 防止游戏发生内爆的外部威胁(如奥斯曼帝国)。
在国与国之间的“健康竞争”中，国之间在软实力和硬实力上竞争，艺术和文学可以蓬勃发展。在一场“恶性竞争”中，当各国可以相互征服时，它们会专注于硬实力。
在伯罗奔尼撒战争之前，希腊城邦之间的竞争很激烈。中国的春秋时期也是一个健康的竞争时期。

Susanna Viljanen
The problem with Islam was that its fundamental core tenets never recognized the difference between philosophy and theology, physics and metaphysics. One of the core tenets of Islam is Occassionalism, which denies the law of causality.
You cannot evolve the scientific method if you deny the law of causality. It will stultify the cultural evolution.
Paradoxally Indian civilization, with Hinduism and Buddhism, and the concept of karma, came very close to this breakthrough.
Likewise, Capitalism could never have evolved in the Islamic sphere, and the reason is simple. Islam condones slavery, and slavery creates a horribly divided society into filthy rich, dirt poor and the slaves - there is no middle class, and no free labour, which are the fundamental pre-requisites for Capitalism. Likewise, if the only laws are Sharia and ruler’s whim, there is no judicial safety and no security of ownership and concepts of legal rights. The Islamic economy was doomed to remain as a bazaar economy and not evolve any further.

伊斯兰教的问题在于，它的基本核心教义从未承认哲学与神学、物理学与形而上学之间的区别。伊斯兰教的核心教义之一是“偶然主义”，它否认因果律。
如果你否认因果律，你就不能发展科学的方法。它会阻碍文化的发展。
自相矛盾的是，印度文明，包括印度教和佛教，以及因果报应的概念，非常接近这一突破。
同样，资本主义也不可能在伊斯兰世界发展，原因很简单。伊斯兰教纵容奴隶制，而奴隶制造成了一个可怕的社会分裂，其中包括肮脏的富人、肮脏的穷人和奴隶。没有中产阶级，没有自由劳动力，而这正是资本主义的基本前提。同样，如果唯一的法律是伊斯兰教法和统治者的一时性起，就没有司法安全，也没有所有权和法律权利概念的保障。伊斯兰经济注定要继续作为一种市场经济而不再进一步发展。

Certainly the Muslim mathematicians developed algebra. But they never found the connection between philosophy and mathematics, science and mathematics and engineering and mathematics. They remained as separate spheres. That is one of the pre-requisites again for the scientific method.
Healthy competition is the thing which powers the cultural evolution. The Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) faced too hard competition and it was in a defensive war at all its fronts throughout the history. While it had all the pre-requisites for the rise to the next evolutionary level, all its resources went into warfare. There is a reason why the Byzantine armies have always been the wargamers’ all-time favourites, but the same reason also stultified the cultural evolution there in the 12th century.
Likewise, too little competition will coagulate any those processes which run the cultural evolution, and likewise stultify the cultural evolution. If the surrounding world is also less evolved, a blissful complacency is almost guaranteed.
But let us suppose Mongolia, Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia had been stronger and culturally more evolved than they historically were during the era of Spring and Autumn, and the Warring States. Would it have also meant that the state of healthy competition would have prevailed?

当然，穆斯林数学家发展了代数。但他们从未发现哲学和数学，科学和数学，工程和数学之间的联系。它们仍然是分开的领域。这也是科学方法的先决条件之一。
健康的竞争是文化进化的动力。东罗马帝国(拜占庭帝国)面临着过于激烈的竞争，历史上一直处于防御战争中。虽然它拥有上升到下一个进化阶段的所有先决条件，但它的所有资源都投入了战争。拜占庭军队一直是战争玩家的最爱，这是有原因的，但同样的原因也阻碍了12世纪的文化演变。
同样地，过少的竞争将凝固任何那些运行文化进化的过程，同样使文化进化变得迟钝。如果周围的世界也没有那么发达，那么几乎可以肯定会陷入一种自满情绪。但是，让我们假设蒙古、朝鲜、日本、越南、印度尼西亚和马来西亚在春秋和战国时期比历史上更强大，文化也更发达。这是否也意味着健康竞争的状态会占上风?

Su Chao
I was raised a Roman Catholic. However, over the years, I came to the realization that the core theologies of different faiths in the world, after millenniums of evolution, do not differ fundamentally. It is their earthly institutions that at different times, drew the physical separations between the people, i.e. it was not the thoughts, but the subsequent interpretations motivated by politics that divided us.
Hence, I wouldn’t claim that Islam, the faith, is prohibitive to innovations and quest for truth. Instead, why would Occasionalism, a doctrine raised three centuries after the birth of the religion was not overturned? What geopolitical forces preserved its relevance? Please also remember that the Occasionalism doctrine coexisted with the Islamic Golden Age for 200 years and didn’t hinder the Golden Age at all. Furthermore, I would argue it was the Mongol invasion that gave rise to a conservative counter resurgence that in turn bolstered Occasionalism. The aftermath of the Mongol invasion decisively turned ancient China inward looking and isolationist.

我从小就是罗马天主教徒。然而，多年来，我意识到，世界上不同信仰的核心神学，经过几千年的演变，本质上并没有什么不同。是它们的世俗制度在不同的时期，把人们分开，也就是说，不是思想，而是由政治驱动的后续解释，把我们分开。
因此，我不会说伊斯兰教这种信仰阻碍了创新和对真理的追求。相反，为什么在宗教诞生三个世纪后兴起的偶然主义没有被推翻? 是什么地缘政治力量保持了它的相关性?请记住偶然主义与伊斯兰黄金时代共存了200年，并没有阻碍黄金时代的发展。此外，我认为是蒙古人的入侵导致了保守势力的复兴，而这反过来又支持了偶然主义。蒙古入侵的后果使古代中国果断地转向了内向型和孤立主义。

Religions are not static, they evolve as our understanding of the universe progresses. Religious institutions are not static, they evolve when faced challenges.
The Roman Catholic Church was not kind when its own interpretation of the universe was challenged. There were Copernicus, Galileo and Bruno. However, the highly fragmented feudal system under the Holy Roman Empire gave rise to the Reformation, and SURVIVED and PROSPERED. This is the “healthy competition” I highlighted in my previous comment.
I do not agree with your argument that “Certainly the Muslim mathematicians developed algebra. But they never found the connection between philosophy and mathematics, science and mathematics and engineering and mathematics. They remained as separate spheres. That is one of the pre-requisites again for the scientific method.” If you study the Islamic Golden Age more carefully, you should see it as a Renaissance of the Near East. The Islamic Golden Age was NOT indigenous, but a free exchange of ideas on the extension of all thoughts in its geographical vicinity. They spent a hundred years translating different scxtures into Syriac and Arabic. They borrowed heavily from Greek and Roman and Persian and Indian philosophers. They clearly understood the connection between philosophy and mathematics and physics and astronomy. Scientific method is often credited to Ibn al-Haytham, and Islamic Golden Age scholar. For that duration of the world history, the Near East was the best environment for scholars and polymaths. In fact, some of their works made to ancient China along the Silk Road.

宗教不是静止的，它们随着我们对宇宙的理解而发展。宗教机构不是静止不动的，当面临挑战时，它们会进化。当罗马天主教会自己对宇宙的解释受到挑战时，它并不友善。出现了哥白尼，伽利略和布鲁诺。然而，神圣罗马帝国下高度碎片化的封建制度引发了宗教改革，并存活下来且繁荣起来。这就是我在前面的评论中强调的“健康竞争”。
我不同意你的论点——“穆斯林数学家当然发展了代数。但他们从未发现哲学和数学，科学和数学，工程和数学之间的联系。它们仍然是分开的领域。这也是科学方法的先决条件之一。”
如果你更仔细地研究伊斯兰的黄金时代，你应该把它看作近东的文艺复兴。伊斯兰的黄金时代不是本土的，而是一个思想的自由交流，在它的地理范围内扩展所有的思想。他们花了一百年的时间把不同的经文翻译成叙利亚语和阿拉伯语。他们大量借鉴了希腊、罗马、波斯和印度的哲学家。他们清楚地了解哲学、数学、物理学和天文学之间的联系。科学方法常常被认为是伊本·海瑟姆(Ibn al-Haytham)的功劳，他是伊斯兰黄金时代的学者。在世界历史的那段时间里，近东是学者的最佳环境。事实上，他们的一些作品是沿着丝绸之路传到古代中国的。

The Renaissance later in Italy, in turned, borrowed heavily from the Islamic scholars. Knowledge is shared and propagated.
The question goes back to why innovations stagnated everywhere else besides Europe? Hence, my theory of a “healthy competition”.
I tend to believe that the rise of the Ottomans led to a “bad competition” in the Near East, and later secured “no competition” after they sacked Constantinople and consolidated power in the wider region.
The Autumn and Spring Period was a “healthy competition”, but the Warring State Period was a “bad competition”. An unified ancient China had no peers in its corner of the world, and its nearest equals were ancient India across the Himalayas and ancient Persia across the deserts and mountains.

随后，意大利的文艺复兴也大量借鉴了伊斯兰学者的观点，知识被分享和传播开来。问题又回到了为什么除了欧洲，其他地方的创新都停滞不前?因此，我提出了“健康竞争”的理论。
我倾向于认为，奥斯曼帝国的崛起导致了近东地区的“恶性竞争”，后来他们洗劫了君士坦丁堡，并在更广泛的地区巩固了权力，从而确保了“无竞争”。
春秋时期是“良性竞争”，战国时期是“恶性竞争”。 一个统一的古代中国在它的角落里没有对手，与它最接近的是跨越喜马拉雅山脉的古印度和跨越沙漠和山脉的古波斯。