In the feudal society after the Yuan Dynasty, the Chinese rulers neglected science and technology. There used to be a saying that intellectuals ranked “number 9”in terms of social position, slightly higher than a beggar. The long-term examination system had seriously impeded people from the pursuit of science and technology. In the recent four to five hundred years, especially since the late Ming and early Qing Dynasty, the seclusion policy had been implemented by China’s feudal Dynasties, which not only closed its door to the world, but also missed the scientific, technological and industrial revolutions in the world. China became poor and weak. It apparently fell behind the tide of development in the world.
In terms of the scientific development in the world, modern science and technology was introduced to China about 100 years ago. At that time, the technological revolution flourished in Europe and the Nobel Prize began to attract the world’s attention, whereas there had hardly been any modern technology in China, nor a single university. Some statistics say that there were no more than 10 people in China who understood calculus. China had experienced many vicissitudes during the 100 years, especially before the birth of the new China. China was ravaged by the world powers and there had been endless wars and chaos, which immensely traumatized the Chinese people.
Let us trace back and compare the scientific and cultural thoughts between China and the west. The theories of the natural philosophy of the ancient China and Greece are similar. The ancient Chinese people’s understanding of the objective world can be summarized in Yin and Yang, the Eight Trigrams, and Wu Xing (Five Elements), namely, metal, wood, water, fire and earth, whereas the ancient Greeks attributed everything to “Four Causes”, i.e., dryness, wetness, coldness, and heat, or water, fire, earth and air. In fact, their common point was that the world was evolved from some material things. However, it turned out that a strict logical system has been gradually formed in the west and resulted in the scientific theories through scientific experiments. However, a social, political and ethical system far from the natural science had come into being in China. Thus, the modern science based on controlled scientific experiments and strict mathematical reasoning was not cultivated in China.
In terms of the comparison between the cultural traditions between China and the west, the western culture is more concrete and precise, which is embodied in strict logical thinking; there is a good tradition in the pursuit of differences and novelties, whereas the traditional Chinese culture tends to be embodied in intuitionistic and analogical thinking, which is fuzzy and inaccurate, and there is a lack of logical and mathematical tradition. Moreover, it is too utilitarian and basic research is neglected. There had been no experimental tradition and a complete scientific system in ancient China, resulting in a loss of position for science and technology and the impetus and mechanism for the boosting of productivity through science and technology.
Joseph Needham, as was previously mentioned, once put forward a question of great significance: “why modern science did not occur in China?”, which was called Needham's Grand Question. He had some well-known ideas to explain it: modern science did not occur in China was because: firstly, there was no view of nature which could facilitate the growth of science; secondly, the Chinese people was so practical that many discoveries were only empirical; thirdly, the examination system in China stifled people’s interest in exploring the natural laws; the eight-legged essay smothered the interest of the students in exploring nature and they focused themselves on ancient books and the pursuit of fame and fortune; “to become an official by excelling in one’s study” has become the first aspiration of the scholars. In fact, this influence still roots deep in the present Chinese society. The strong official-oriented mentality has exerted severe negative impact on science and innovation.
Print
Save