What aspects of islam made the middle east fall behind the west technologically...

What aspects of islam made the middle east fall behind the west technologically? or was it simply because greeks fled to italy and sparked the renaissance because they were fellow christians?

Lack of a bourgeois class that was independent of the ruling elite and could invest on arts and literature

Mongols

Having the Islamic center of power being taken over by turkic steppe nomads

It wasn't the actual religion, nothing had changed

It was the interpretation of it which led the basis for a society that shunned the unknown, exploration, and pushing boundaries. It's a problem in many Islamic societies even today. You just can't debate or talk about certain things, even in hypothetical scenarios. You can understand why this environment would not be conducive to scientific or literary advancement

Following this you have the cementing of the region and a long standing tradition imposed by the ottomans, which were never exactly known for their cultural or scientific contributions. They focused their caliphate on expansion and military tradition

And today we see ignorance and violence in the Middle East. But what is not to expect when those were the seeds planted over 500 years ago?

>What aspects of islam made the middle east fall behind the west technologically?
Technology follows no linear progression. If the west didn't exist who to say the same technological advancements would ever exist?

The industrial revolution happened in England for whatever reason and spread to Europe from there. No aspect of Islam caused the industrial revolution to begin in England.

Bait post. Kys

Immigrants

Rome was destroyed by Gothic immigrants who seized power and turned everything to shit

Arabia brought in tonnes of Turkic slaves who ended up taking power for themselves and ruling the country and driving everything towards shit

Turks are unironically the worst thing to happen to the Middle East

Mongols came, wrecked shit, and left. Turks stayed for centuries, they are the reason the region stagnated and fell behind.

This.

>What aspects of islam made the middle east fall behind the west technologically?

The Qur'an literally demands sharia, and sharia is not conducive to a technological progress.

When you have a culture that thinks it already has all the truth necessary for all eternity, it'll be very hard to do anything outside the box.

I'm pretty sure science is viewed as "bid'ah"(Innovation/Heresy), in Islam, hence it'll never be accepted.

Around the time of the mongol conquest some muslims were becoming extremely uncomfortable with the degeneracy and decadence present in their society.

Unlike Christianity Islam is a war religion; the caliphate relied for much of its theological legitimacy on continual expansion, and being the undefeated people chosen by god, being genocided by the mongols really got them thinking they were doing something wrong.

A man named Al-ghazali wrote a book around this time called The Incoherence of the Philosophers in which he argued that because the philosophers could not prove with their "logic" the truth of Islam then logic was obviously wrong, and the only Muslim thing to do was to abandon all philosophical inquiry apart from Islam. This line of thinking caught on in a big way.

From this point on there would be no real caliphate and the technology would be adopted from the west. The gunpowder empires that grew out of this period are actually extremely interesting, much of the technological stagnation in the Islamic world in this time might also be explained by their being dominated by foreign Turks for several centuries.

Islam remained the wests strongest opposition, and the Ottomans still managed to hang in there and were capable of standing somewhat respectably against the west right up until ww1. The power gap between islam and the west was not quite so enormous as it seems it was today.

Also I get some US fundamentalist vibes from this pic

>A man named Al-ghazali wrote a book around this time called The Incoherence of the Philosophers in which he argued that because the philosophers could not prove with their "logic" the truth of Islam then logic was obviously wrong, and the only Muslim thing to do was to abandon all philosophical inquiry apart from Islam. This line of thinking caught on in a big way.
>wikipedia scholars still believe this
>who was Ibn Taymiyyah
>who was al-Wahab
>what is Wahabism

>muh foederati killed rome meme!

The question he asked was why did Islam fall technologically behind the west, not why are muslims today radicalized. Wahhabism was only really influential in arabia until oil rich saudi arabia became a thing.

Taymiyyah is also important in the general trend of closing off non islamic thought though.

>A man named Al-ghazali wrote a book around this time called The Incoherence of the Philosophers in which he argued that because the philosophers could not prove with their "logic" the truth of Islam then logic was obviously wrong, and the only Muslim thing to do was to abandon all philosophical inquiry apart from Islam. This line of thinking caught on in a big way.

This is entirely wrong. Al-Ghazali predates the Mongols by several decades, and his "Incoherence of the Philosophers" only lists and critiques several philosophical conclusions, only three of which he felt were contrary to religious truth, and rather than abandon philosophical inquiry his work fused philosophy, popular Sufism, and Islamic law together and popularized philosophical tools in religious study, to the point where his books were burned by the Almoravids and later condemned by Ibn Taymiyyah for religious innovation.

The answer to the OP is that Islam was barely a factor, and instead it boils down to the decline of Middle Eastern urbanization and degrading climate.

The Hadiths. Most muslims are actually retarded enough to believe "claims" which were reported more than a century after the death of the Prophet. You'll find the most disgusting and barbaric stuff in these "claims".

>What aspects of islam made the middle east fall behind the west technologically?
Nothing, really. There's only so much you can do to keep up with a region with low population density, decreasing fertility, and violent nomad migrations making both of these things worse than they already were.

>or was it simply because greeks fled to italy and sparked the renaissance because they were fellow christians?
The Renaissance was already underway. The Greek refuges of Italy spent most of their time teaching rich kids to read plays in Greek while everyone else worked on science in Latin based on Latin and Greek texts they had since long before the 15th century.

Ah fuck off we protected the arabs from crusaders and shit till the last days of our empire.

Protected them like the Crusaders protected the Byzantines (or the Turks protected the Byzantines from the Franks for that matter)

Oh tell me how we mistreated arabs.
We might have stopped developing after the 17th century but thats just how societies are out with the old in with the new and everything.

>sharia is not conducive to technological progress.
>I'm pretty sure science is viewed as "bid'ah"(Innovation/Heresy)

"No"

Far East ethnicities are older and coulnd not into fast modernisation. Same way as brilliant Ancient Greece or Italiy currently worse than France and Germany, which worser than Sweden or Korea.

The so called "Golden Age" which was a double-edged sword.

While the Abbasids indeed removed the opressive nature of the Umayaads and gave Shia's, Persians and other Ajam more rights within the Kaliphat and modeled it around a more "multi-cultural" structure so Arab/Persian science could bloom under their rule it also stopped the expansion.
Add in the fact that Persians would be given higher positions of authority and the many islamic theologists that would pop-up all over the place questioning the Sunni denomination and it was bound to fragment into all these meme-states and regional dynasties only around 150 years in to their rule that the Arabs would never recover from. Sure, science and technology was still output by them but not at previous capacity and it lasted like another century until the Ghaznavid/Seljuk Turks arrived and conquered the entire thing around 1050 CE. And that was followed by the Khwarezmids and then the Mongols and the rest is history.

You'd think Islam only works when the rulers rule with an iron hand and focus on conflict rather than technology, which would explain why the Ottomans ruled for aslong as they did without any major incidents from their subjects.
But then you look at the Cordoba emirate that had the same Umad rulers and decent science output.

>A man named Al-ghazali wrote a book around this time called The Incoherence of the Philosophers

Yeah, but in Arabic "philosophers" in this title is a loanword from Greek "falasifa", which doesn't mean all branches of thinking we would term "philosophy" nowadays, but only the Greek and Greek-influenced thinkers, particularly the Peripatetics. So he wasn't against all philosophy, just some branches of it.

Similar to how one might say they're against shari'a but it wouldn't mean they're against the existence of laws in general, even though shari'a just translates to "law".