|
Prior to the modern era, haven't MOST societies limited which parts of their population were allowed to engage in philosophy/science? Or at least tried to limit who could do such things to specific institutions? I mean, look at India. They had a strict cast system that barred huge portions of their population for engaging in certain activities. Yet they made many advances in mathematics. Under your logic, the Indian mathematicians don't deserve any credit, because them being the innovators was only based on keeping so much of the population suppressed. Or what about in China? Do you think that anybody outside of the Imperial examination system was allowed to do science? You don't think they tried to maintain a monopoly on who could do these things? What you're saying makes sense with modern conceptions of personal liberty and freedom of ideas. It doesn't make sense when you try to apply it to the past, and realize that most ancient societies were highly restrictive compared to the modern era.
I'm not quite comfortable with the standard you're using to judge the past, because it seems to have this judgmental air to it that seems to insinuate that every group doing science prior to the modern era were just a bunch of hacks slowing down progress.
|