Why the Scientific Revolution Occurred in the Christian West and Not Asia, By Brian Simpson and Peter West

 The Unz Review article by Jonas E. Alexis (linked below) poses a provocative question: Why did the Scientific Revolution, the explosive emergence of modern empirical, mathematical, and experimental science in 16th-17th century Europe, happen only in the Christian West, and nowhere else? Despite impressive technological achievements in ancient China (gunpowder, printing, advanced metallurgy, deep drilling, multi-masted ships), the Islamic Golden Age (algebra, optics via Ibn al-Haytham, preservation of Greek texts), India (zero, numerals, linguistics), and even Egypt or Greece (geometry, engineering), no other civilisation birthed sustained, cumulative scientific inquiry leading to laws of nature, inertia, experimental method, and mechanistic cosmology. The answer, the piece argues, lies in Europe's unique philosophical and theological bent — a synthesis of Christian monotheism with Greek rationalism — that created the metaphysical preconditions for science as we know it.

At its core, the Christian worldview provided a rational, orderly, intelligible universe governed by discoverable laws set by a transcendent, personal Creator. Genesis declares a definitive beginning ("in the beginning God created"), linear time (creation to consummation), and secondary causes (consistent natural mechanisms rather than constant divine micromanagement). This implied contingency: the world isn't eternal or chaotic, but contingent on God's rational will, making it lawful and open to human investigation. As Alfred North Whitehead noted, the "faith in the possibility of science" derived from medieval theology. Historians like Rodney Stark (The Victory of Reason), Stanley Jaki, and Toby Huff emphasise this: Christianity's linear teleology, rejection of eternal matter or cycles, and command for humans to "subdue" creation (Genesis) encouraged empirical observation and progress. Thinkers like Aquinas synthesised Aristotle's unmoved mover with Scripture, while 14th-century scholastics like Nicole Oresme used graphs to resolve Aristotelian motion paradoxes — precursors to calculus and inertia.

Contrast this with other cultures:

China: Technologically superior for centuries (blast furnaces, cast iron, horse collars boosting yields 8-10x, durable roads), but its cosmology was cyclical (eternal recurrence via seasons/Tao), lacking a personal lawgiver. Needham observed this "stifled" abstraction; harmony arose from intrinsic nature, not external decrees. No teleological progress or unified causal laws emerged — maths stayed tied to concrete problems.

Islamic world: Came closest during the Golden Age (empirical pioneers like Ibn al-Haytham, algebra, Maragha observatory). Mu'tazilite rationalism promoted reason, but Ash'arite occasionalism (God causes every event directly, e.g., al-Ghazali's critique in Incoherence of the Philosophers) prioritised divine will over secondary causes, blocking consistent laws. Fatalism and theology-over-reason halted momentum post-11th century.

India/Egypt/Greece/Rome: Cyclical or chaotic cosmogonies (eternal matter, competing gods) lacked unity or progress. Polytheism implied unpredictable divine whims; Greek geometry was brilliant but sporadic, without institutional cumulative drive.

Europe's edge wasn't just ideas — it was institutional: universities (Bologna 1088 onward), Church-funded observatories, print, and a culture valuing reason illuminated by faith. Many revolutionaries (Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Boyle, Newton) were devout Christians seeing science as decoding God's handiwork. The 1277 Condemnations freed inquiry from rigid Aristotelianism, while the Reformation boosted literacy and questioning authority.

This isn't triumphalism — Europe's synthesis was contingent, fragile, and often resisted (Galileo trial myths aside). But the metaphysical precondition was unique: a Creator who makes the world rational yet not divine, inviting exploration without pantheistic merger or fatalistic surrender. Other civilisations innovated brilliantly but lacked the worldview for systematic, law-seeking science. Stark calls it "essential"; Jaki speaks of "stillbirths" elsewhere.

In a politically incorrect but substantiated sense, this challenges secular narratives that science triumphed despite religion. The West's theological bent — monotheism's rational God, linear history, human dominion — didn't hinder; it enabled the revolution. Without it, the modern world as we know it likely wouldn't exist. Today's secular science inherits this legacy, yet often forgets its roots, risking a drift into new dogmas. The lesson: cultural metaphysics matter. Europe's unique bent wasn't inevitable, but it proved decisive.

In short, it was Christianity which gave Western European man the theology and world view to create the modern world.