Hacker News Reader

Comment by fsckboy | Hacker News Reader

I don't like writing the obvious things that everybody always says, but here we are, nobody has said it yet:

there was a book or paper out like 25 years ago that speculated that as the Age of Enlightenment coincided with the start of European tea and coffee drinking, the general uptick in the usage of stimulants instead of alcohol must have contributed to the intellectual flowering through to the Renaissance, at least for the literate classes.

So that's when one group of people stopped being drunk all the time.

View on HN

Yet these stimulants were already consumed in other places in the world - before the europeans. why no Renaissance there? Or yes it had?

https://www.txst.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definition....

That's the difference between a sufficient condition and a necessary condition. It's likely a combination of factors were required that might not have been available in other places. But there were something akin to renaissances in other places before Europe, but changing environments/factors limited their impact or spread, or even outright ended them.

I always find the argument "but why didn't this happen elsewhere" bizarre, when ... it usually has happened elsewhere. Ignorance isn't a great argument. Like, other places often had sewers and other sanitation long before Europe, which implies that alcohol could have been a limiting factor for Europe while not being a limiting factor elsewhere.

There is something really special about European development. Chinese history is absolutely fascinating with a lot of super cool inventions, but nothing stands close to European history and it's power.

You'd need to define that something special, else you sound really racist. More likely Europe stumbled on a couple of things such as reading glasses (that gave much longer working lives to scientists) or the steam engine that gave an advantage.

>You'd need to define that something special, else you sound really racist.

...I think that says more about you than me.

That I'm not racist? What is so special about Europeans?

They don't owe you an explanation just because something they probably said innocently could be construed as having racist undertones. While I'm willing to believe that you believe you are doing the right, anti-racist thing by calling them out, you basically attacked them before knowing what they meant, and that feels more like the bad-faith race-trolling that sometimes pretends to be anti-racism online.

White supremacy is basically this, "we are special". Needs to be called out in its tracks. They don't have to explain, but they can expect push back like I gave and can easily clarify if I was misinterpreting, which they chose not to.

You didn't even establish that they're white before you attacked.

Like I said, I called it out in its tracks and gave them the chance to correct if there was a misunderstanding.

European achievements in the Enlightenment and Rennaissance and Classical Period and Industrial Revolution were special, full stop. You're the racist if you think it's because of their race, as evidenced by you injecting race into the conversation. You see things racially.

The OP said the Chinese did some good things but nothing like the special Europeans. It was clearly a race discussion.

I should probably finish reading it but doesn't "Guns, Germs and Steel" give a totally non-racial explanation for what they are saying?

It does, though, while an interesting story, its been criticized as being one that is inadequately supported.

I remember a similar read. I think it also helped that armies become more disciplined, could march longer (coffee was a stimulant vs. alcohol), also the workforce had fewer errors. Any chance that somebody knows the reference?

Which way does the causal arrow point?

Tobacco also.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com