AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL
This article analyzes the fundamental influence of Chinese technological innovations on the development of modern science and technology in the West, challenging Eurocentric perspectives that attribute the exclusivity of scientific thought to the Greco-European tradition. Drawing on the seminal stud...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Review of Culture |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Articles |
| Published: |
Instituto Cultural de Macau
January 2003
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.icm.gov.mo/rc/viewer/pdfViewerParts/40005/2704 |
| _version_ | 1877196271432761344 |
|---|---|
| author | Ana Maria Amaro |
| author_autocomplete | Ana Maria Amaro |
| author_browse | Ana Maria Amaro |
| author_facet | Ana Maria Amaro Ana Maria Amaro |
| author_sort | Ana Maria Amaro |
| container_title | Review of Culture |
| container_title_str | Review of Culture |
| container_volume | 5 |
| container_volume_str | 5 |
| description | This article analyzes the fundamental influence of Chinese technological innovations on the development of modern science and technology in the West, challenging Eurocentric perspectives that attribute the exclusivity of scientific thought to the Greco-European tradition. Drawing on the seminal studies of Joseph Needham and other renowned sinologists, the author explores China's chronological precedence in crucial domains such as iron smelting using hydraulic bellows and steel production, techniques that predated corresponding European advances by many centuries. The text addresses the central paradox of the historiography of science — known as the "Needham Question" — seeking to explain why the Scientific Revolution consolidated in Europe and not in China, despite Chinese technical superiority until the fourteenth century. Through comparative analysis, Amaro discusses the geographical, social, economic, and philosophical factors that dictated distinct paths for the two civilizations, refuting the thesis that Confucianism was an intrinsic obstacle to progress. It concludes that modern science is an ecumenical construction that owes much of its initial impetus to the assimilation of knowledge and techniques originating from the Middle Kingdom, emphasizing the importance of recognizing Eastern roots in the genesis of global technological modernity. |
| first_indexed | 2026-09-11T02:56:51Z |
| format | Articles |
| genre | Articles |
| genre_facet | Articles |
| hierarchy_browse | Review of Culture{{{_ID_}}}zotero-coll-76L3BRGH |
| hierarchy_parent_id | zotero-coll-76L3BRGH |
| hierarchy_parent_title | Review of Culture |
| hierarchy_sequence | 0000 |
| hierarchy_top_id | zotero-coll-WX87PJHD |
| hierarchy_top_title | News |
| hierarchytype | Default |
| id | zotero-Q2SGDBSM |
| institution | zotero_group |
| issn | 1682-1106 |
| last_indexed | 2026-09-11T02:56:51Z |
| latest_content_date | 2026-09-11T02:56:51Z |
| publishDate | January 2003 |
| publishDateRange | 2003 |
| publishDateSort | 2003 |
| publishPlace | Macau |
| publisher | Instituto Cultural de Macau |
| publisherStr | Instituto Cultural de Macau |
| record_format | zotero |
| spelling | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL This article analyzes the fundamental influence of Chinese technological innovations on the development of modern science and technology in the West, challenging Eurocentric perspectives that attribute the exclusivity of scientific thought to the Greco-European tradition. Drawing on the seminal studies of Joseph Needham and other renowned sinologists, the author explores China's chronological precedence in crucial domains such as iron smelting using hydraulic bellows and steel production, techniques that predated corresponding European advances by many centuries. The text addresses the central paradox of the historiography of science — known as the "Needham Question" — seeking to explain why the Scientific Revolution consolidated in Europe and not in China, despite Chinese technical superiority until the fourteenth century. Through comparative analysis, Amaro discusses the geographical, social, economic, and philosophical factors that dictated distinct paths for the two civilizations, refuting the thesis that Confucianism was an intrinsic obstacle to progress. It concludes that modern science is an ecumenical construction that owes much of its initial impetus to the assimilation of knowledge and techniques originating from the Middle Kingdom, emphasizing the importance of recognizing Eastern roots in the genesis of global technological modernity. Instituto Cultural de Macau Macau Review of Culture Articles January 2003 Ana Maria Amaro |
| spellingShingle | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL Ana Maria Amaro |
| title | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL |
| title_autocomplete | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL |
| title_full | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL |
| title_fullStr | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL |
| title_full_unstemmed | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL |
| title_short | AS RAÍZES CHINESAS DA MODERNA TECNOLOGIA OCIDENTAL |
| title_sort | as raízes chinesas da moderna tecnologia ocidental |
| url | https://www.icm.gov.mo/rc/viewer/pdfViewerParts/40005/2704 |
| zotero_collection_key | 76L3BRGH |