I don't know what you are trying to say here.
> The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe.
No. It says more about Europe than China. It shows that china had what europe needed/wanted/etc. Also, europe wasn't "exploring" at first. They were seeking a path to china/india/etc after their overland access to china ended with the turkish conquest of constantinople and the russian overthrow of the golden horde. It isn't an accident that europe started "exploring" soon after their trade route to china was cut.
> Why should they?
Ask them. All I said was that they were. You claimed they weren't and I just wanted to correct you. I'm not saying they should've have been or not. I'm just saying they were.
> we had Roman writers write too about "superior Germanic culture" (bellum germanicum).
And? I'm trying to make sense of your response so far and I can't.
> By the way, do you know why the Opium war happened? Besides having the inferior technology on the Chinese side? Do you know what the reasons was?
Yes. China has superior products that europe desired and ran a deficit...
> It should be a warning to China today.
Not quite. Different type of trade system and different environment. The deficit back then aren't the same as it is today. The chinese didn't use the trade deficit to buy british debt/treasuries/etc. As strange as it sounds, but it's china that's really running a deficit and it should be a warning to us.
It's naive to think we are in the same situation as in the early 1800s. We are not. The roles are reversed. It's china who is in awe of the west. It's china who wants western goods. It's china who wants to come to the west. It's china that's hungry and ambitious. It's china sending people all over the west to trade, learn, etc.