Joe Kissell writes today on the Antikythera Mechanism, which seems to be an analog computer constructed by a Greek in 82 BC. Much of the technology embodied in the device was lost, only to be reinvented hundreds of years later. What does this teach us?It reminds us that the “historian’s bias” is conservative, but can lead us into error. Just because something is not documented, does not mean it did not happen.
My experience as a design engineer has taught me that loss of technical know-how occurs almost continuously. As the pervious generation of creators pass out of active production, leaving their works and even their designs, we do not always know why or how these creations were made. To pass on the torch of knowledge requires an input of resources. The point is made well by Hans Hoppe: “The danger is not that a new generation of intellectuals cannot add anything new or better to the stock of knowledge inherited from the past, but rather that it will not, or only incompletely, relearn whatever knowledge already exists, and will fall into old errors instead.”
All of this is to say that where there is a danger of slipping into capital consumption, so too there is a danger of losing technology. Books and articles and manuals and reports capture and carry a part of the load, but this part is perhaps smaller than most non-technical people imagine. A large part is due to the ongoing verbal dialectic between individual creators. This forms part of the reason that the internet has not obviated professional and academic conferences.
Passage of knowledge in all fields from generation to generation is critical to the progress and improvement of our civilization. As with most important things, this passing of the torch of knowledge is commemorated in song. Since I design ammonia plants, I’m partial to this one:
And word by word they handed down the light that shines today
And those who came at first to scoff, remained behind to pray…
Through all the doubt somehow they knew
And stone by stone they built it high
Until the sun broke through
A ray of hope, a shining light Ammonia Avenue
{ 10 comments }
1) Who paid for all the studies on the mechanism?
2) It said that the mechanism was badly corroded and some of it was gone altogether. When it was reconstituted, was there bias inherent in the approach? Was it reconstructed with the built in anachronisms of today’s viewpoint?
3) What this shows me is that there is truly no pure ‘progress’ in the metaphysical sense of mankind steamrolling to some ethereal future of heaven on earth. Knowledge is the ever shifting in nature and quantity of mental potentials in the people at any given moment.
Our state of existence isn’t really all that different from 2000 years ago. We are still applying value judgements on each other and the resources around us. And there is still a self chosen few who think they have a higher moral compass, and a superior system of value, and are not afraid to use Force on others. Nothing much has changed, since I assume, getting back to point 1, that resources gathered by force to be used under the value judgements of a few were used in acertaining the nature of this long lost machine that is of little use than as a curiosity.
I just spent the weekend with a retired aerospace engineer that specialized in the
metals to use in jet engines. One point that
came up in our talks was that much of the knowledge they developed on the impact of high tempatures on metals is now being lost as his generation retires and the firms they worked for are consolidating with other firms.
Kissel count is a joke: catapult is roman, astrolabe is arabe, camera obscura was an invent of XVI° cent.jesuit so-called scientist Athanasius Kirchner. This object was probably a toy. So what? Our perception of reality is almost the same of 2000 years ago, so Brad is correct.The faults of internet is well described:in this moment i’m spywired.The fun of greek was payed by slave labour as like in today chinese consumer folly in wall&mart. Civilization?
Our state of existence isn’t really all that different from 2000 years ago.
Our perception of reality is almost the same of 2000 years ago
What on earth are you two talking about? No difference between then and now? I suspect you might feel differently were you able to experience both times. I’m sure all the developments between then (in both “state of existence” and our “perception of reality”) and now seem quite obvious to you and me, but that’s just 20/20 hindsight. Two millennia ago, man had a keyhole view on reality. He barely understood how he was able to feel the things around him or the rain that fell on his head. Now we know. That’s not some mundane thing for you to dismiss.
Maybe you’re thinking of some deep spiritual/mystical/religious perception, but I would put forth that the reason that hasn’t advanced is because there’s nothing to advance.
What this shows me is that there is truly no pure ‘progress’ in the metaphysical sense of mankind steamrolling to some ethereal future of heaven on earth
Most of the people 2000 years ago, if transported to my life that I live today, would consider it heaven on earth in not only a physical but “metaphysical” sense, just as we will for our descendent’s future in 2000 years. Mankind IS steamrolling towards this beautiful future you speak of, at a faster rate than at any other time.
One point that
came up in our talks was that much of the knowledge they developed on the impact of high tempatures on metals is now being lost as his generation retires
Which is why corporations with important “sticky knowledge” like this are going all-out to record and retain it. If the company your friend worked for just let him walk out without having him train/educate/pass-on his business-critical knowledge, then they are going to be crushed by the many many companies that did. We may have forgotten things that happened 2000 years ago on the other side of a Dark Age, but we don’t anymore — the knowledge is too valuable and confers too much competitive advantage to forget.
The fun of greek was payed by slave labour as like in today chinese consumer folly in wall&mart. Civilization?
If you can’t see the difference between Greek slaves and voluntarily employed Chinese citizens, then it’s no surprise you can’t recognize or appreciate the amazing civilization around you.
It’s fascinating to watch people dismiss the fantastic progress around you using the very tools that personify that progress. If you don’t understand how the internet, among other things, has revolutionized how we see ourselves, and humanity as a whole, then you just don’t get it.
Brian, too good for theoretical aprioristic apology of progress & knowledge and too few for experience and empirical matter. You may think what you prefere about the magnificency of human destiny but human feeling is quite different to two third of people with 2 bucks a day to live with, on this earth. An horrific injustice among human are on track. You may get well “informed” with this stupid machine I’m using this second, but “understanding” is a different matter.Personal experience, on high temperature, is not trasmitted by some books. A difference in enjoing the life is cut down by conformism and omologation. If you are in Florida, Egipt or Wietnam your experience is quite the same, same news, same technology, same corporation leaded consumerism, same manipulated food of no taste etc. But I personally don’t want to dispute your ingenous believe in a better future: this is already assured you by world leaders down the road, academics, mainstream media etc. Read something of Nietzsche for exemple, or Heidegger, but correctly and you will experience the other face of the coin.
With 2 bucks per day one man cannot afford to live AND study, but knowledge in itself is crossed by an subtle trail of nihilism. I don’t see much fraternity out there and even not much freedom a part a blatant rethoric of politicians that in many case have few studies, for one your own leader, for two my own, etc.etc. Regards.
but human feeling is quite different to two third of people with 2 bucks a day to live with
Fair enough. Let’s use your number: 66% of humanity lives on the brink of starvation.
2000 years ago it was 99%. That’s progress, especially considering that the rate of people exiting 3rd world conditions and moving upwards is increasing. By your very words you admit that 33% of humanity does NOT live under those conditions. We are only scratching the surface of how we can better ourselves.
If you are in Florida, Egipt or Wietnam your experience is quite the same, same news, same technology, same corporation leaded consumerism, same manipulated food of no taste etc
I’m sure that Floridians, Egyptians and Vietnamese would disagree that their lives are so easily lumped into some kind of interchangeable homogeniety. You are saying that all three peoples eat the same food? Given that Muslims frown upon consumption of pork, I’m pretty sure most Egyptians don’t go to the same type of BBQ joints that Floridians do.
In fact, its the wealth of human progress that has allowed them to be so different. 2000 years ago they did indeed lead much of the same lives — farm, breed and die. Now, large segments of the population in these 3 places can experience enough new things to fill a lifetime — and many of them can then cheaply travel the globe to experience the things their foreign cousins do.
But I personally don’t want to dispute your ingenous believe in a better future: this is already assured you by world leaders down the road, academics, mainstream media etc
Heh, my belief in a better future is hardly based on the proclamations of my “leaders” or the media. They would much rather convince me that the future is grim — it gets better ratings/poll numbers.
Here’s one example: my sister was born with a congenital heart defect. If she had been born even 5 years earlier, she would never have survived. With this modern technology you brush off so lightly, she will live a full life. The value of her life, and the knowledge and experiences she will enjoy, stand in defiance of your casual dismissal.
A difference in enjoing the life is cut down by conformism and omologation.
You see conformism and amalgamation. Yet I see the flourishing of thousands of independent cultures around the world and new musical/artistic styles appearing every day. Modern humanity is more diverse and heterogenous than at any point in history — and the reason for this is enhanced communication. Just search google — you’ll find hobbies, art forms, philosophies and sports you’ve never even heard of.
You yourself espouse a philosophy that no primitive society would ever tolerate. The fact that we are so advanced allows people like yourself to have such a low opinion of how technology has helped, because you aren’t reliant on it for your survival.
You may get well “informed” with this stupid machine I’m using this second, but “understanding” is a different matter.
Understanding is facilitated through mental faculty, information and experience. The internet, as well as thousands of other technological advancements, allows me to improve my access to all three of those things. Therefore I submit that it indeed DOES help my understanding of the world around me — although as you so ably demonstrate, even those with all the clues in front of them will be sometimes be unable to gain true understanding.
With 2 bucks per day one man cannot afford to live AND study.
Precisely as you state, humanity requires that their immediate needs be satisfied before embarking on any “study” of understanding. This means you agree with my point that technology has freed a large chunk of humanity from those immediate physical needs, and allowed them to study and gain this “understanding” you speak of.
For Spencer: Two more examples are concrete,and
the cure for scurvy. The Romans used concrete
to build the Pantheon and other buildings but the
technology was lost, not to be rediscovered for
1800 years.
The English merchant navy used lemon juice to prevent scurvy but this practice gradually ended
as old Quartermasters retired and younger ones
didn’t know why this expensive juice was being
bought.(This was in the 1500s.)
If you’ve ever read “A Canticle for Leibowitz,” it talks about a future post-apocalyptic world where some Catholic monks have (as they did in Ireland during the dark ages) retained ancient books about engineering and science, faithfully scribing them despite no knowledge of what the words actually mean — until the re-emerging world knew how to use them.
A book about the real-life work of Irish monks to save pre-Dark Ages knowledge can be found in Thomas Cahill’s “How the Irish Saved Civilization.”
Dear Brian,i too was born with heart defect, i was stricly instructed by doctors DO NOT MAKE any sports and denyed two times military service. I’m 68 has made many sports and military service too, without caring about the noble art of medicine and refusing at any time to be involved in the “health industry” with its crooks. A caveman? May be. I’m an antiquarian bookseller and you speak about the Dark Age. Why a Dark Age existed if any? If your infantile enthusiasm for civilization that “progress” so clearly (toward what?) during time, you means western civilization of course, i imagine, WHY this progress stopped? Obviously i know the legendary accounts of Irish monks but they saved nothing because there was no engeneering or science wathsoever in ancient manuscripts. The Romans have leave NO write documents. The antique greek texts was collected by arabs that produced some good works in astronomy,mathematics, empirical medicine on their own and after time translated into latin. For medicine the galenic arrangement was dismissed only 2 century ago, the chemical science was pure alchemy just to Lavoisier i.e.end of XVIII° cent., the biology is in its essence more or less aristotelic right now, the physic DO NOT PROGRESS in THEORY, hence in transferable knowledge, much from Newton “absolute space and time” to relativity, quantum and Eisenberg principle of indetermination; all are “paradigm” in se, not a progress from a theory to another, just to put some exemples. The “tecnology” i.e. the application of “art” or “tecnic” to this sort of paradigm have empirically improved (if you think that the application of “broken atom” is an improvement for humanity) The science is a modern concept not an ancient one and ever less transferable via written books. More precisely “pure science” like pure phisic is encouraged by states and/or private corporations in the former case mainly for technical application in the military field, in the latter ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY for extreme profit they may permit (no matter if wright or wrong face the real or presupposed scientific TRUE) You call civilization the fly you took to go to Ho Chi Minh city? or call civilization to bomb the same city? Decide you. Jews and arabs don’t eat pork that’s know for religious rule of law, but MacDonalds is everywhere with his vomitous foods. Many people like this stuff? Well, many people like a conformist point of view about western civilization. Not me. I repeat I have no intention to convince you via raison, you have all the right to think what you want. Via “reason” you may spread around the world the magnificent and progressive destiny of humanity but in this way you are innocently (or not?) spreading the INTERESTS of the powerful leaders of the dominant States AND that of dominant corporation. Some have made of this spread of ideas a lucrative JOB but, unfortunately, this is not my case. Regards.
All technologies are derivatives of basket-weaving.
Comments on this entry are closed.