[empath75]

To criticize certain countries and how they handle refugees is not to lay the blame for all the evils of the world at the feet of ‘the west’

And how would modern medicine and western science have faired without Arabic math and the Arabic preservation of Greek medical texts?

World history is complicated, and human misery has many fathers.

[baud147258]

The Greek texts were preserved by the Roman empire. And those in Constantinople went West when the city was taken by the Persian Empire. Some of the texts in the Western part of the Roman Empire were preserved in monasteries, that's the reason the reimplementation of Roman Law innovations was spearheaded by the Church.

[linkmotif]

> And how would modern medicine and western science have faired without Arabic math and the Arabic preservation of Greek medical texts?

Probably just fine. I’ve read my share of Aristotle and let me tell you, it doesn’t seem to have been a boon to Europe that people kept reading that crap. I mean the guy advocated for slavery as a good/natural thing. And was literally anti-empricical. His philosophy of science boiled down into a sentence was basically “if you think it, it must be true.” God knows how long his work kept the Scientific Method from the mainstream. Galileo was persecuted because the church coopted Aristotelian thinking as dogma. It’s great the Arabs saved all that stuff, but imo it’s great for historical reasons. Very little of it was actually useful legit stuff in the way we think of things today.

[woodruffw]

> His philosophy of science boiled down into a sentence was basically “if you think it, it must be true.”

Aristotle didn't have a "theory of science," because he didn't have just one science: he had the practical, rhetorical, and formal sciences, each with its own first principles.

> Very little of it was actually useful legit stuff in the way we think of things today.

Besides classical logic, universals, and virtue ethics, right?

[linkmotif]

> Aristotle didn't have a "theory of science”

Well yeah, so I should have said natural science.

> Besides classical logic, universals, and virtue ethics, right?

I don’t know: I went into the Classics expecting to encounter some great stuff—what with like 1000 years of hype and all—only to be pretty underwhelmed. My takeaway was that The Church put these Greek guys on a pedestal around 1200 and everyone in Europe didn’t know better until the Renaissance. Sure they played a role in history, but I never encountered anything particularly uniquely or irreplaceable or exciting in the Greeks that you can’t find elsewhere.

[woodruffw]

Yeah, Aristotle's impact on natural science is a mixed bag. On the other hand, that's not where his influence lies these days.

Just out of curiosity, what context did you read him in? Aristotle's influence is still very much felt across philosophy: virtue ethics is one of the three major schools of contemporary ethical thought, and deductive reasoning/classical logic are what every logic class begins with.

Aristotle has definitely been put on a pedestal over the years, particularly by powers looking to associate themselves with some sense of classical Greek "greatness". However, that doesn't diminish his real contributions to philosophical (and mathematical) thought.

[ionised]

> Very little of it was actually useful legit stuff in the way we think of things today.

The way YOU think of things today. You don't speak for the rest of us.