Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
Scientific advancement is a constant -- but the *speed* of scientific advacement is quite obviously impossible to predict...
I suggest that scientific advancement isn't necessarily
a constant .. it's only a constant if the culture values
"progress". This isn't always the case, as progress
causes change. Change means that the people on the
top of the heap go to the bottom, and thus the
people on top tend to resist it. Since they *are* on
top, they have an excellent chance of stifling
technological innovation in the bud.
Example: The UK was one of the very last Great Powers in the world to build a submarine fleet. Why? Because their surface navy was already master of the world's oceans, thank you. Building or encouraging submarine development
would not have helped their position, but might have jeopardized their sea control if the knowledge ever got out. So they turned away submarine inventors, and as a result Germany, France and the US (all of whom had a vested interest in seeing the status quo go away) got there first.
Example: In the 19th century there was a movement in England called the Luddites who made a name by smashing industrial machinery. After all, this new technology was destroying the way of life of the skilled craftsmen, replacing them with machines run by unskilled labor. 100 years later 20th century workers have resisted the use of robotics in factories, since they destroy the *industrial*
way of life.
Example: In the 1600s Europeans began to bring firearms to Japan, and for a time there were Japanese musketeers as well as Samurai. The Shogun decided that he didn't want these things in Japan, because A) He didn't need them to rule Japan, but they could be used to equip a revolt, and B) buying and selling temded to get Europeans involved in local politics, something he abhorred.
So he outlawed guns and expelled the Europeans. Because he
was draconian enough, he was able to make it stick. Japan
remained a medieval society for 200 years before advanced
Western technology forced a hasty modernization from 1853-
1903.
Thus -- progress only happens if the people on top want progress, generally because they are in competition with someone outside who will defeat them if they do not continually innovate. If there is no external threat, the powers-that-be seem to tend to quash innovation, because it threatens their position, power and wealth.
Respectfully,
Brian P.