Thanks for the discussion. A few points using the numbers I inserted above:
- The Ottoman Empire not only was NOT always weak, it very nearly conquered Europe on many occasions. On the surface, I see two possibilities for its rise to power. A. Islam tends to create great nations based on the generative power of its philosophies. B. The Islamic regime that built the Ottoman Empire did a masterful job of recognizing and integrating the great achievements of the peoples it conquered. The size and scope of those people conquered made for some enormous synergies in civilization building - for a time.
I tend towards B because it explains how the Ottomans, in spite of the massive lead they had in EVERYTHING (science, philosophy, art, math, architecture…) managed to be leapfrogged by the west which had previously languished in all those areas since the center of the Roman Empire moved to Constantinople. I’d further assert that Islam’s stance of viewing God as “inscrutable” rather than a being who defines Reason and in whose image we are created is responsible for the later stagnation of these fields in which they once held such leads over the west.
- Yes, one can always construct convenient explanations after the fact if one is trying to do that. It’s even fair to assert that I’m trying to do precisely that. But your examples aren’t good disproofs. Your main assertion is that my argument applied to England (or France) should mean that Catholicism is inferior to Protestantism. I suppose this might be true if economic and technological progress is the ONLY measure of civilizational merit. But it’s not. I’d argue that the cost of such a monetary view of human existence that has generally accompanied the abandonment of Catholicism is only now (a mere 4 centuries later) coming to roost in the utter failure of such societies to even have enough children to replace themselves at death. The Islamic empires coasted longer on the merits of their conquered peoples than that! Philosophical deficiencies take time to manifest in civilizational decline. But they do.
- I’m not good at reading implications. Are you suggesting that Russia instigated the uprisings throughout the ME? What’s that got to do with the question of whether something inherent to the philosophy of Islam contributes to a tendency towards dictatorship. Please connect the dots.
Thanks.
1a. The problem is that both A and B are not unique or limited to Islam or Islamic based cultures/societies. One of the great strengths of the Romans was their practice of doing B (the equipment used by Roman soldiers is a great example of this).
1b. The “Islam held them back” argument is very similar to the “Christianity held them back” argument that was popular in the studies of Medieval Europe. This argument also ignores the fact that at one point in time the Christian West was ahead of, then passed by the Islamic states of the ME, portions of Europe, and Africa (see Mali Empire).
2a. Catholicsm v. Protestantism in England- You are artificially limiting my example to just economics. After the abandonment of Catholicism we see England advance ahead of the rest of Europe and the world in not just economics, but in politics/individual rights, civil and military tech, communication, and the “hard” and “soft” sciences.
2b. I also didn’t just indicate 2a. There is also the colonial system, monarchy, religion as a whole, etc. Trying to say “X is the real reason a country failed” doesn’t work because states and societies are far more complex than for one item to cause it’s fall. One item can serve as a catalyst for a state or society’s fall (Rome- barbarian invasions, ERE- Islamic invasions, China- Mongals, pre-Revolutionary France- failed economics, USSR- failed economics to list a few examples), but it takes more than one item to serve as the source of a state or society’s downfall.
3a. Russia-Syria- Russia’s current stance and support of Syria is an example of what the West did during the Cold War in regards to other repressive regimes in ME states. Russia, like the West, will continue to keep “it’s man” in power as long as it serves its interests. Islam/Islamic based culture has nothing to do with the question of dictatorship (especially since the dictators in question were Western/Soviet installed)
3b. The “Arab Spring” isn’t due to Islam, it’s due to the West no longer propping up “their men.” A quick browse of past examples of what happens when a repressive regime falls will show that the “Arab Spring” isn’t unique and isn’t caused by Islam or Arabic culture. Three European examples that I can name off the top of my head would be the fall of Tsarist Russia, the fall of pre-Revolutionary France, and the fall of Yugoslavia.
3c. Also, the rise of extremist groups/ideology isn’t limited to just internal strife due to repressive regimes or Islamic based cultures. The American Revolution and the rise of Fascism during the last century being prime examples of this.
3d. The rise of dictators, as well, isn’t a unique facet of Islam/Islamic culture. See Fascism, USSR under Stalin, China under Mao.
or maybe I’m misunderstanding the intent of the Author 
