This is a moderated community.
The goal is to encourage people to approach mathematics in a fashion that makes it accessible. In order to do this, we're going to need a few basic rules.
- Try to be on topic.
- Be civil.
- No drama.
Pretty simple, huh? Yeah... I reduced them to the lowest common denominator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Off-topic is tolerated to some extent. Submissions should all be about mathematics, or clearly relate to mathematics. However, once you get into the comments section, it's a much looser standard. Discourse is encouraged, so long as civility is maintained. Good conversations tend to meander around topics and that's perfectly acceptable.
If you do vote, concentrate on promoting content and not downvoting content. Encourage and comment, if you see something that could use improvement. Downvotes don't convey very much information and aren't really helpful. If you must, you must... But try to assume the person making the post was just communicating poorly. Try to assume the best possible interpretation of their post.
Some terms:
- WDT Weekly Discussion Thread
Greek Alphabet:
Α α, Β β, Γ γ, Δ δ, Ε ε, Ζ ζ, Η η, Θ θ, Ι ι, Κ κ, Λ λ, Μ μ, Ν ν, Ξ ξ, Ο ο, Π π, Ρ ρ, Σ σ/ς, Τ τ, Υ υ, Φ φ, Χ χ, Ψ ψ, Ω ω
Hebrew Alphabet:
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ/ך ל מ/ם נ/ן ס ע פ/ף צ/ץ ק ר ש ת
Other common symbols:
¬ → ⇒ ⇔ ∀ ∂ ∃ ∅ ∇ ∈ ∉ √ ∞ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⊕ ∫ ≈ ≠ ≡ ≤ ≥ ⊆ ⊂ ⊃ ⊄ ° ± · × ⟌ ÷ ⌊ ⌋ ⌈ ⌉ ➀ ℤ ℕ ℙ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℍ ℭ
If you're interested in academia, you can feel free to also join us at v/PrincipiaAcademia where we discuss all things academic.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] TheBuddha [S] 2 points 2 points 4 points (+4|-2) ago
That's not how this works. You made a claim contrary to the accepted history, the onus is on you to provide evidence to back up that claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - and there's a ton of evidence supporting exactly what I said. I've been forthcoming and shown you said evidence instead of saying, "Look it up yourself!"
Let's see....
I think that's correct - am I missing a step in there? I just want to make sure we're on the same page. See, I've done my research and this is what I came up with. I've done my job.
As I said, it's not a major concern if you choose to believe whatever. What is important is that I've posted the correction here and provided citations so that other people can see the evidence and reach their own conclusions. Meh... Either way, I think we can pretty clearly agree that the golden age of Arabia is long since gone and that the current area is, as Trump might say, "A shithole."
[–] Shekelstein6M 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago (edited ago)
"As Ibn Khaldun, the fourteenth-century Arab historiographer and sociologist suggests, it is a remarkable fact that with few exceptions, most Muslim scholars in the intellectual sciences were Ajams ("Persians"):"
Now you can do more of your own research, if you want to actually question your own beliefs.
[–] TheBuddha [S] 2 points 1 point 3 points (+3|-2) ago
Allow me to quote your statement with which I have objection (and which your own quote confirms my statements):
So, I need only point to one example to demonstrate that as untrue. You've been kind enough to do that for me.
Here was your initial statement:
Which, now demonstrably false if we accept your statement at full value.
If we view my initial statement, it was that a goodly amount of our mathematics came from Arabia - which remains true. Much of this was done (and advanced) while under the empire.
I'm NOT saying that it was a panacea - and, to go back to my original statement, I am saying they were pretty good stewards. Indeed, they were.
There's seemingly some miscommunication here. I will try to make it more clear.
Math and science did pretty well under the Arabic empires (there were several disputing empires and some strange history). Some of this advancement was done by people of Arabic decent. Some of it was done by people who practiced the Muslim faith. All in all, they did pretty well with it.
They were not the apex of knowledge. They were not some glorious scholars who lived an idyllic life of higher learning. They had wonderful centers of knowledge and preserved much of the older bodies of work which some scholars give partial credit for the enlightenment.
This is pretty clearly established stuff.