The Muslim Dark Ages

by Luke Muehlhauser on April 29, 2009 in General Atheism,Islam,Video


Obviously, the above is not an exact chart, but it does represent how some historians view the Christian Dark Ages. (My guess would be that the collapse of the stable Roman Empire had at least as much effect as the domination of Christian religious dogma that stifled the pursuit of any heretical knowledge.)

But look at the right edge of that “chart.” We’ve made amazing progress in the last 300 years.

Many atheists are also excited about the recent explosion of non-belief in the world. According to the World Christian Encyclopedia, a respected source on religious demographics:

The number of nonreligionists…  throughout the 20th century has skyrocketed from 3.2 million in 1900… to 918 million in AD 2000…

So we’re okay now, right? We’ve passed the tipping point, and religion is going to slowly die out as education and prosperity spreads around the globe. As science reveals more of how the world actually works, religious beliefs will appear more and more laughable. So we’re gonna be okay, right?

I’m not so sure. In fact, if I was forced to bet, I’d say we’re headed for another dark age. And it has nothing to do with evidence, education, intelligence, or anything that should control the future of the planet. No, the second dark age will be a simple consequence of demographics.

Educated people, who are more likely to be non-believers, have way fewer kids than ignorant, poor, religious people. This means that whichever religion becomes dominant (Islam) will take over the world not by convincing educated adults of their ridiculous myths and barbaric morals, but by having lots of babies and brainwashing them all while non-believers simply don’t bother to have kids because they’ve got other things to do.

This video, made by and for Christians, illustrates (with real numbers) the terrifying consequences of high birth rates among the religious:

If that doesn’t scare lovers of reason, freedom, progress, and morality, I don’t know what will.

Update: tinyfrog’s analysis of these numbers is here. Conclusion: Most of the numbers are just plain wrong. As I should have expected, the video is nothing but Christian propaganda.

I don’t know what’s going to happen. But I think the following is at least plausible:


So what’s the moral?

I can’t convince non-believers to have more kids. And I can’t convince religious people to stop having kids.

But I can do some things. I can promote reason and evidence-based thinking. I can criticize blind faith and magical thinking. I can invite liberal or moderate religious people to inform and challenge fundamentalists, who are the real danger anyway. I can defend the separation of church and state (something Christians will probably see the value of once Islam takes over the majority). And I can promote the advance of science as much as possible while we still have a culture that allows it.

And maybe, if we’re lucky, the Muslim Dark Age will never come. Maybe.


By the way, a great summary of the current demographics of atheism is Zuckerman’s Atheism: Contemporary Numbers and Patterns.

Update: Remember, I’m not making a serious argument here. It’s merely a rant, and a possible future. Also, obviously I do not think that all Muslims are poor, ignorant fools who have nothing better to do than pop out kids and brainwash them. But that does describe huge masses of them. And it’s not like it’s their fault that they’re ignorant or that one of their only social freedoms is to raise children. And of course there are also masses of ignorant, uneducated atheists all over the world. And it’s also no great achievement for me to have been born into a life of privledge. That’s just how it happened.

Previous post:

Next post:

{ 36 comments… read them below or add one }

Taranu April 29, 2009 at 11:35 am

What do you mean by Transhuman Renaissance and by Posthuman Explosion?


Reginald Selkirk April 29, 2009 at 11:49 am

He means Teh Computerz will take over.


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 12:09 pm

It doesn’t really matter for my fake progress chart, but see here.


Justin April 29, 2009 at 1:43 pm

I agree with you whole heartedly on this subject. The indoctrination of children is the biggest obstacle that we need to overcome.  We will become a smaller and smaller % of the population unless forces other than indoctrination are used. We’ll be outbred.. :(


Justin April 29, 2009 at 2:04 pm

The tone in the video was laughable, but it’s content was scary.

I think it missed a step though. It demonstrated the future well but did not explain why it should be averted. There was no threat other than there will be more muslims!! There are and have been more christians in Canada and it’s not exactly a problem. The problem is that they will not integrate with our culture. They will and do try to change it. I do not want to live under their laws. In the US there is the constitution which is supposed to protect the minorities. In Canada i’m not sure if I’m afforded such luxuries.

I would edit my last comment but it’s not possible, so excuse the double post.


Matt April 29, 2009 at 4:12 pm

This post is a joke right? Sorry, I’m kind of new here, so still trying to figure out your tone. But since some comments indicate their readers took it seriously, so I hope you don’t mind me pointing out that the fake progress chart isn’t merely fake, it’s absolutely absurd. What exactly does one increment of “scientific advancement” equal?
Also, it’s absolutely false that “some historians” represent the medieval period this way, if by “some historians” you mean credible contemporary historians and not either “Sam Harris” or “historians who worked over 100 years ago.”
Finally–and again I am really sorry if I’m just totally misreading the tone of your post, which might in fact be a brilliant satire of today’s atheism–the classism and sneering, benighted condescension for the world’s poor and underprivileged (usually in the position as a result of “Enlightened” western colonialism) is sad–Obama’s remarks in PA look like compliments by comparison.
In short, if this is what “promoting reason and evidence-based thinking” looks like–vacuous reasoning without any evidence beside charicature and condescension–good luck getting any moderate religious folks to join you. You’ll just be preaching to the choir, I’m afraid.


Lorkas April 29, 2009 at 4:18 pm

Maybe if the transhuman revolution comes fast enough, we can avert another technological dark ages.


Justin April 29, 2009 at 4:28 pm

Hi Matt,

What you call classism is the truth. Differences between what you call classes are realities. What luke is mentioning in his post about differences between nations is just true.

Your comments  would be more founded if you provided examples too!

The Scientific advancement chart is just a visualization. “Obviously, the above is not an exact chart, but it does represent how some historians view the Christian Dark Ages.” is taken straight out of the post! The point is to demonstrate the effect of the undeniable suppression of science in the western world during the dark ages.


danielg April 29, 2009 at 4:52 pm

I apologize for the length of this comment in advance :D.

Interesting hypothesis, but I see a lot of things wrong here.  I may take time to make my own charts and respond in a post.  But let me at least give an overview of my objections.

1. The ‘Dark Ages’ is largely a creation of anti-Catholic Enlightenment historians, not a true representation of the state of technology or human rights during that time, as Rodney Stark has discussed.  He talks about the technological advances during the middle ages, which were not non-existent.

2. I assume that your actual ‘numbers’ for your measurement of technological progress are qualitative, and not based on empirical research. 

3. If  we replace “Scientific Advancement” with “human rights”, you might see a very different pattern.  For instance, under Greece and Rome, I’m not so sure they increased.

4. One of the difficulties of determining who gets the credit for the rise of the west is, who led whom?  The Protestant Reformation and Enlightenment were pretty much in parallel, so it’s hard to establish causation. 

But I would argue that it was actually Protestantism that led the way, and here’s one of many reasons why.   If the egalitarianism and free thought of the enlightenment led the way, we would expect to see many ideologies besides xianity flourshing under the protection of the enlightenment ideals.

But since pretty much ONLY Xianity flourished, I would argue that the freedom and prosperity that we see in the west, which pretty much only shows up where Protestant revivals has taken place (with a few modern exceptions that may have benefited from the Protestant work ethic and colonialism), is due to xianity leading the way, not the elightenment.

5. As for having children, while Islam has many negative features (and I am being kind), it’s placing value on children is not bad.  Not as bad as the murderous one child policy of China, nor the equally murderous and selfish ‘choice’ movement in the liberal west, IMO.

6. “Educated people, who are more likely to be non-believers, have way fewer kids than ignorant, poor, religious people.”

This has enough half truths to drive a truck through.  In the west, it is a falsehood that liberals are more educated. See my analysis in Who’s more dumb and evil? Neocons or libs?.

It is true that liberals have fewer kids, but I would turn your value-laden phrase “by having lots of babies and brainwashing them all while non-believers simply don’t bother to have kids because they’ve got other things to do” around and say “believers, by having lots of children, loving them and teaching them virtue, are increasing, while non-believers, believing the lie of the over-population myth, trapped in the hyper-individualism and materialism of the west, and victims of the abortion industry, are decreasing.”

7. Islam will not take over, and here’s why.  First, as the books America: The Last Best Hope and Steyn’s America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It relate, Europe, and to a great extent, Canada, have succumbed to Islam due to rampant multiculturalism, and the inability of secularism to answer spiritual questions.  Islam just sneaks in through immigration, Muslim child bearing, the vacuum left by rejection of xianity and the embracing of science as savior, as well as brute fear and intimidation.

However weakened xianity is in the US, the evangelical movement, as I’m sure you’ll agree, is still very much alive, and unlike the multi-culturalists, we have no problem calling out Islam for its cruelty and lies.  And while atheists also do so, their objections are diluted by the fact that they fail to differentiate between fundamentalist Christians, who at worst will call someone a sinner and try to prevent various legislations, and militant Islamists, who want to indiscriminately murder.  When you fail to make such distinctions, your accusations are much less powerful.

Second, while we do see a decline of faith in the west and the encroachment of Islam in its wake, what the news fails to report is the amazing growth of Xianity in China, as I discussed in Islam’s Worst Nightmare – Not America, but Christian China. In a few short years, there will be more Xians in China than the entire US population (still a small percentage of Chinese), and they are more radical in their desire to preach the gospel all the way back to Jerusalem – right across the heart of Islam.  As I related in my article, they are currently training tens of thousands of missionaries that plan to give their lives to preach the gospel across the Middle East.

8. I have no problem with your attacking blind faith.  I have done it myself, though in another manner – I don’t put all faith into that bucket – see The Atheist’s Caricature of Faith.

9. As to ‘fundamenatlists,’ this term’s broad, pejorative modern use is not helpful, for two reasons.  First, as I said, it lumps comparatively benign Christians with militant Islamists, diluting your attack.  Second, it is inaccurate to claim that all conservative evangelicals are ‘fundamentalists’ in an unhealthy manner.  You may enjoy doing that, but not only do we not self-define that way (like me calling all agnostics ‘atheists), but I think that it is demonizing and derogatory.  See my post What is a Fundamentalist Christian?.

10. Church and state – you have grossly oversimplified the Christian position to one of theocracy v. secularism, when the true biblical position is a less stringent type of separation – but that idea is actually a biblical one, in part anchored in Jesus’ saying “render unto Ceasar…”.  Please read my opinions on this in Uneasy Neighbors – Church and State (the most scholarly treatment), The Four Historic Models for Church/State Interaction, and Separation of Church and State, but not God and State.

11.  As to promoting science, I am all for it, as long as you are not promoting the narrow materialist science.  Please see my posts Religion, innovation and economic progress – Part I (Part II), Darwinism Impeding Science (I didn’t get far in that series, but want to add Einstein’s gravitational constant in his negative reaction to the big bang), and How scientific materialism undermines science and reason


danielg April 29, 2009 at 4:54 pm


I just submitted a nice long comment which probably got caught by the spam filter due to too many internal links.  But I promise it was all meaningful and necessary.  Can you publish?  Thx.


Chuck April 29, 2009 at 5:00 pm


Small problem with your analysis. I don’t see how muslims outpace atheists in this country. Just because we get lots of them in places like Saudi Arabia and Turkey, does innovation in this country suddenly cease?


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 5:07 pm


1. I don’t think the Dark Ages is dismissed that easily. There really was a huge gap in scientific progress between the rise of Christianity and the renaissance. That’s not something I invented. It happened.

2. There are no numbers in the “chart.” Read my first sentence.

3. Yeah, this was a chart about scientific progress, not human rights.

4. The Enlightenment clearly had more effect on scientific progress. Martin Luther’s statements on faith and destroying all knowledge that contradicts the Bible should be a hint of that.

5. I’m not saying Islam’s value on children is BAD, just acknowledging that it has demographic consequences for the world.

more later…


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 6:01 pm


6. Your post compares education levels between two political parties. I am comparing education in believers vs. non-believers. My vague understanding of the data is that they fair about equal in college degrees, but around Ph.D. level there is a sharp drop-off in religious belief.

I’ll try a hybrid: “Believers are increasing by having lots of children and teaching them to respect whatever ancient tradition they were born into rather than figuring things out as best they can. Non-believers are decreasing by not having children.” Now that’s simply factual.

7. Okay, point by point:

“the inability of secularism to answer spiritual questions” – If you mean that secularism should answer questions about non-existent spirits, then yeah. But religions get no points in my book for just making up answers because people want answers that involve an afterlife and invisible friends.

“the vacuum left by rejection of xianity” – I don’t doubt that. The human mind longs out for the comforting, easy answers offered by religions.

“the embracing of science as savior” – well, to be frank, science saves billions more lives than religions ever have. Heck, Norman Borlaug’s scientific achievements alone have spared more lives than all the prayers and religious offerings ever made in the history of humanity. Almost everything you can think of that makes your life comfortable and healthy is the product of SCIENCE. But I certainly don’t think of science as a “Savior” in the Christian sense of the word.

“unlike the multi-culturalists, we have no problem calling out Islam for its cruelty and lies.” I think I partially agree with this. The European governments are pussies for being so inclusive that they are starting to allow Sharia courts to act, and for example just outlawed criticism of Islam instead of protecting free speech. Christians seem to be more willing to rightly criticize the cruelties of majority Islam than the secular governments do. Sometimes I wonder if Christianity will be the only force willing and strong enough to save us all from Islam. I would much rather live in a world dominated by Christians than by Muslims. Maybe China will save us.

9. Did I equate Christian fundamentalists with militant Muslims? I don’t see that anywhere. And did I say that all evangelicals are fundamentalists? I don’t see that anywhere, either. But I get what you’re saying about “us and them” thinking, and demonizing. I try to avoid that but it’s hard to do because there really is and us and them who are combating and it’s important that the truth wins (we both agree on this, I think), and it really is true that, say, huge swaths of the Muslim world are full of ignorant, violent people. If I had been born into that life then I would be an ignorant, violent person, too – but still, they are ignorant, violent people. It’s not their fault, but a fact’s a fact.

10. I wasn’t referring to whatever your theory of church-state interaction is. I was referring to the dominant view of church-state interaction I hear promoted by public figures from mainstream Christianity all the time.

11. Thanks for linking to so many of your posts. How ’bout this? For starters, pick one of your posts that you want me to respond to and I will write a full blog post in response to it. A good way to keep hopefully helpful conversation going, maybe…


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 6:04 pm

Comment to EVERYONE: As I tried to stress, none of what I said is backed up by quantitative data or anything. I think it’s merely a possibility. Go ahead and point out that my argument is weak, and I will agree with you. I had no intention of making a compelling argument for this post. It was merely a rant and a merely possible future, not a probable future.

I do not “admit” that it’s a weak argument, I assert that it’s a weak argument, in this case.


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 6:06 pm


Muslims are not just in Saudi Arabia and Turkey. They’re taking over all of Europe. Next after that is the U.S., if they can.

What “analysis”? This was idle speculation. :)


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 6:10 pm


Not a joke. But not meant to be a compelling argument, either. It’s idle speculation. I tried to make that clear in the post itself. The above post is NOT a good argument or based on lots of evidence. It’s a remote possibility. It’s a rant. This post had a very different purpose than some of my posts that are carefully argued. I tried to make that clear in the post.

As for “sneering” at the underprivileged, where do you get that? Is it “sneering” to point out that ignorant, uneducated, poor people are ignorant, uneducated, and poor? I have no colonial intentions…

I’m curious, what were Obama’s remarks in PA? I remember the ones in Frisco about guns and religion…


Mark Van Steenwyk April 29, 2009 at 6:17 pm

I realize that you’re not trying to make an argument per se, but you are trying to suggest some things with this post. It may not be a formal argument, but this piece is disheartening and highly problematic in the sorts of assumptions it makes about scientific advancement, how such advancement relates to religious belief, and about socio-political economics.

My contention is that this chart has less to do with religion than it has to do with Empire. Empire is what drives scientific advancement. When a centralized power is able to mobilize resources within vast borders and is driven to marshal those resources towards its own superiority over other nations (military and communications technologies) and find ways to maintain its vast populations (medical and quality of life technologies), advancement happens. There are some small exceptions, but this is largely true.

And so, scientific advancement comes with a hefty penalty…not the giving up of silly beliefs, but large-scale oppression.


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 6:43 pm


You might be absolutely correct, and I have no rebuttal. As you realize already, I intended to make no argument here. :)

Thanks for posting.


Matt April 29, 2009 at 6:47 pm

Hi Matt,
What you call classism is the truth. Differences between what you call classes are realities. What luke is mentioning in his post about differences between nations is just true.
Your commentswould be more founded if you provided examples too!

The Scientific advancement chart is just a visualization. “Obviously, the above is not an exact chart, but it does represent how some historians view the Christian Dark Ages.” is taken straight out of the post! The point is to demonstrate the effect of the undeniable suppression of science in the western world during the dark ages.

You’re right to say I could use some examples of my own, Justin. In terms of history of the Middle Ages, I promise that absolutely no contemporary historian will make any claim approaching that in the post. A good place to start is Edward Grant’s Foundations of Science in the Middle Ages. Here’s one further attempt to clarify: There are obviously class differences, this is no doubt true. But what I want to question is the post’s assertion that because people are poor, they have nothing to do but sit around and brainwash their dozens of kids. This is the sort of bad faith, paternalistic argument that has always characterized the colonizer’s relationship to the colonized: “Those poor fools. If they would only realize that Thinking is the answer to all their problems, they’d be so much better off, just like me.”
So to respond to Luke, and I’d agree also with what Mark said, the fact that you so quickly and readily identify these people as ignorant is problematic. To lump them all together under the category “ignorant” masks the numerous, diverse ways traditions such as Islam are deployed by their followers and put to work for them. Saba Mahmood’s ethnography of Egyptian Muslim women is really helpful on this subject: Politics of Piety.
Finally, then, you’re right about Obama. He was in CA talking about small-town residents of PA. Sorry for misremembering, but it’s finals week, after all!


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 7:06 pm


I think I understand all your criticisms and I think many are valid. But remember I wrote things like “My guess would be that the collapse of the stable Roman Empire had at least as much effect as the domination of Christian religious dogma that stifled the pursuit of any heretical knowledge.”

I do not recall making the assertion that poor people have nothing better to do that pop out kids and brainwash them. I specifically wrote: “while non-believers simply don’t bother to have kids because they’ve got other things to do,” instead of “better things to do.” In most cases, I would imagine that one reason educated, privileged people have fewer kids is because they have so many OPTIONS. The poor don’t have so many choices, but they do have the choice to have kids and raise them.

Re: “Those poor fools. If they would only realize that Thinking is the answer to all their problems, they’d be so much better off, just like me.” Thinking is not the answer to their problems! Most poor people are trapped, and thinking will not free them. No, that would require (1) building a stable government that can provide basic services, (2) allowing social freedoms, (3) making capital available for entrepreneurs, (4) making education available, etc. I’m not saying the poor are poor because they aren’t critical thinkers, and that critical thinking would save them. That’s absurd. Education would help, but there’s much more that is needed. And it is not the fault of the poor that they are uneducated or that they do not have the privileges and options that I have. I realize that if I had been born into that kind of life I would be no different.

And I’m not pretending that I can lump all Muslims into the poor and uneducated. I’m merely saying that great masses, maybe even the majority, are poor and uneducated.

But I can definitely see how you would read all that in my post. I should post an update to it.


Jeff H April 29, 2009 at 7:28 pm

I don’t see the fact that the Muslim population is growing as a bad thing. I have no problem with peaceful, well-meaning Muslims who come emigrate to start a new life. But obviously the danger lies with fundamentalist Muslims who take their religion to the extreme. The same problem comes with Christianity – it’s not whether or not there are a lot of Christians, but if there are a lot of them bombing abortion clinics, we have a problem.

Now I don’t want to take lightly the statistics that were presented, but let me paint another possible future. Perhaps as the Muslim population grows in the United States, more atheists will take note and start debunking their claims. I know this already happens, but more time and effort has been spent on Christianity because it’s the most common in the West. As that changes, more time will be spent dealing with Muslim counter-apologetics, which may turn Islam into “the next Christianity,” so to speak. In other words, a lot of nominally religious Muslims with a core of fundamentalist ones.

Now I don’t claim to have any idea what kind of effects the growing Muslim population will have. The introduction of sharia law into some countries scares me quite a bit. But one can only hope that other religions will try to argue that they want their specific laws respected, and that it will get to a point where people realize how ridiculous the whole thing has become and go back to a completely secular government with church (or mosque, temple, etc.) and state separated. I think perhaps the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster needs to start a petition to get Pastafarian courts established. The more ridiculous people realize it to be, the more likely it is we can avoid the haunting situation of a Western Muslim state.


lukeprog April 29, 2009 at 7:40 pm

Jeff H,

I like your possible future better than the one I worried about. I hope your’e right. :)


Matt April 29, 2009 at 7:59 pm

Luke, thanks for the clarifications. I think we ultimately agree on more than we disagree. Many of my comments were a result of misreading the intention of your post–moving to phrases like “ignorant, poor, religious people” (which, let’s admit, is quite the trifecta!) and too quickly past your concessions and qualifications.


Chuck April 30, 2009 at 12:47 am


Do you have data to suggest that atheists aren’t having children? (Or is it the claim that they are just having less children? If so, I wonder if that is more a related to standard of living than religion. Do Muslims in 1st world countries have the same birth rates as they do in the Arab World?)


UNRR April 30, 2009 at 2:40 am

This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 4/30/2009, at <a href=””>The Unreligious Right</a>


lukeprog April 30, 2009 at 5:10 am

As you may have noticed, I linked to no data, which makes any argument above very weak. Mere speculation. I suspect that standard of living have far more to do with having fewer children than atheism does, but it is true that Islam and Christianity specifically encourages child-rearing, and of course there is no atheist authority recommending the same. Muslims in the 1st world have fewer children than Arab World Muslims, I suspect.


Ben April 30, 2009 at 5:44 am

It does seem like the only thing we can hope to do is to work on not pissing them off and watering them down with education since we can’t outbreed them.  And we can count on them steadily imploding under the weight of their own vacuous and conflicting beliefs.


lecitre April 30, 2009 at 5:26 pm

Valuing children and valuing having children are not the same thing, guys.


tinyfrog May 3, 2009 at 1:06 am

My analysis of the video – where I show that most of these numbers of made-up or exaggerated:


lukeprog May 3, 2009 at 4:57 am


That is superb.


Amir June 6, 2009 at 11:25 am

As a Muslim, living in America for most of my life, and growing up with a variety of views of different faiths or lack thereof, I am comforted that we can share with each other.  I don’t believe in fundamentalism or extremism in anything.  I believe in a balanced way or middle path to all things.  I am open minded.  I’ve seen and appreciate Atheists comments on religious matters and I believe that’s great to have such diversity.

What I don’t like is lies, propaganda, outright hatred and bigotry that “religious” people seem to dwell in.

I do believe in God or a Supreme Being.   I will never force  you to believe in that.  My belief tells me that if I was convinced of such a thing, then you can be equally convinced of such a thing youself, if we both are using our intellect, reason, compassion, etc.  If an Atheist doesn’t believe in the same thing as I do, so what.  Who am I to judge?

Peace to you / salam alaykom



Brian September 1, 2010 at 9:01 pm

And on that note…

Dunt dun duuh DAAAAHHHH!

!!!!!!!!!AN ATHEIST SHIRT STORE!!!!!!!!!

Aristotle’s Muse

This is my favorite atheist store. Maybe wearing an atheist T-shirt won’t change the world, but enough of them just might.


Cane Sokolovski September 15, 2010 at 11:07 am

I am originally from Macedonia. There is a vast population of Muslim Albanians. They had high birth rate too. But with the emancipation and Liberation of the Albanian woman the birth rate declined and now it is similar with Macedonian Christians.At the end everything corrects. What I saw on the video click was scare tactic on a basis of bigotry and racism! I am an atheist okay, but this was nothing about common sense atheism. Shame on you!


poop March 31, 2011 at 10:39 am

Who says that the Muslim Dark Ages will be bad???
1) no more religious wars due to unified world religion!!
2) Many muslim countries excel at scientific fields, such as Iran being the worlds leading stem cell research country
whatever… crazy christians!!


Lorena September 6, 2011 at 1:58 pm

Gotta say, have come to the same conclusion. Think with these hard times globally, more and more people need enemies.


tingkerks October 23, 2011 at 3:17 am

You will be surprised by the discoveries of Muslims. FYI Muslims invented soap, astrolabe(which revolutionized sea travel), invented algebra and trigonometry which advanced engineering and the Arabic numerals which the world still uses today, the introduction of the concept of “0″ zero which greatly advanced the field of mathematics, also introduced the concept of hospital layout where patients are separated from each other to avoid the spread of infection(developed the theory of airborne diseases), the mass production of paper for making books, also the scientific method which consist of the steps: define problem, gather information, form hypothesis, experiment, draw conclusion hypothesis true or false(form hypothesis again), report results, etc..

I recommend you to watch the documentary Empire of Faith. It is a mind opening documentary.


Leave a Comment