<p>Much before Joseph Needham (1900-1995), the British scientist and historian, died at the age of 94, his Science and Civilisation in China was widely recognised as a monumental achievement of 20th century scholarship. It provides an encyclopedic survey of Chinese achievements in science and technology -- physics, astronomy, metallurgy, chemistry, biology, botany, and geology. A respected scholar in the comparative study of civilisations, Needham discovered an entire realm of knowledge, drew together the most recondite details on science and technology into a powerful narrative focused on cross-cultural integration and progress. It is without doubt one of the most influential works in the discourse on the multicultural roots of modern science.</p>.<p>Needham’s conception of world history that frames and shapes its arguments, however, has gone unnoticed. To discern Needham’s worldview, one must go to scattered discussions and suggestions in Science and Civilisation, as his masterwork moved forward.</p>.<p>Needham conceived of world history as shaped by a dialectical relationship between China and the West, and he believed that a synthesis of the two cultures would be furthered through science. Needham thought that such a synthesis would help realise what he called ‘the world co-operative commonwealth’, a global communist society that would be permeated by humane values nurtured in traditional Chinese society.</p>.<p>His idiosyncratic views and political passions thus inspired his seven-volume magnum opus, which is not just an exposition of Chinese science and technology, but to paraphrase the author himself, “a force within world history itself”.</p>.<p>Needham was criticised for his methodology, his Marxist premises, his understanding of Chinese culture, and his stubborn equation of science and technology. In particular, he was faulted for claims related to the comparative historical framework that he employed in his study.</p>.<p>In essence, his critics argued that though Needham’s starting point is that China and the West are antithetical, Science and Civilisation functions as a celebration of Chinese accomplishments and a critique of Western civilisation. Hence, it is worthwhile to understand the broad pattern of Needham’s historical thought for three reasons: First, Needham never shied away from bold generalisations, despite some outdated concepts and a few unsupported assertions, his rendering of world history is remarkable for its synoptic view. He never focuses on individual States but places Chinese, Indian, Islamic and Western achievements within the context of the reciprocity of Eurasian cultures.</p>.<p>Second, Science and Civilisation will likely be an influential work for a long time to come; historians have barely begun to mine the rich material contained in it.</p>.<p>Finally, the most compelling value of Needham is that he was convinced of the essential unity of all peoples; dedicated his life to breaking down cultural barriers, and to proclaiming the lesson that “Wisdom was not born with the Europeans”. He embraced the religion, science and philosophy of the East and West in equal measure.</p>.<p>Science and Civilisation begins with a fundamental question, one that is relevant to India as much as to China: Despite impressive intellectual traditions, a secular and composite culture, scientific curiosity, and substantial technological skill, why did China fail to make the breakthrough to experimental and mathematical science and hence to the industrial revolution? However, as Needham’s work progressed, the question was redefined to: Why did modern science begin in the West and not in China?</p>.<p>Needham brings uncommonly strong political convictions to historical scholarship and, somewhat like Arnold Toynbee, his view of world history is permeated by a sense of prophetic destiny. In attempting to answer these questions, Needham brings forth the remarkable scientific advances made by China in diverse fields. However, his writing says more about his faith in the transformative power of ideas than it does about historical realities in China. It is almost as if his China stands outside history, with no place for the unruly complexity of history or for changes over time and space.</p>.<p>It is challenging to read the multi-volume Science and Civilisation, but you could read an equally engaging book that provides a synoptic profile of the eccentric Cambridge Don; and succinctly presents the essence of his worldview. The biography of Joseph Needham, The Man Who Loved China, by Simon Winchester tells the beguiling story of Joseph Needham, Dorothy Moyle, and Lu-Gwei Djen; as also the composition of Science and Civilisation in China, in absorbing detail.</p>.<p>Despite its flaws, Science and Civilisation is an extraordinary achievement. In the backdrop of an expansionist China that remains a closed society with no democracy in sight, Needham’s work, perhaps ironically, provides a critique of China and points to the one answer that seems to have eluded him: Democracy and an open society are necessary conditions for the progress of science and society. Two values that China and its people desperately need; values that separate India from China that we must therefore persevere to preserve.</p>
<p>Much before Joseph Needham (1900-1995), the British scientist and historian, died at the age of 94, his Science and Civilisation in China was widely recognised as a monumental achievement of 20th century scholarship. It provides an encyclopedic survey of Chinese achievements in science and technology -- physics, astronomy, metallurgy, chemistry, biology, botany, and geology. A respected scholar in the comparative study of civilisations, Needham discovered an entire realm of knowledge, drew together the most recondite details on science and technology into a powerful narrative focused on cross-cultural integration and progress. It is without doubt one of the most influential works in the discourse on the multicultural roots of modern science.</p>.<p>Needham’s conception of world history that frames and shapes its arguments, however, has gone unnoticed. To discern Needham’s worldview, one must go to scattered discussions and suggestions in Science and Civilisation, as his masterwork moved forward.</p>.<p>Needham conceived of world history as shaped by a dialectical relationship between China and the West, and he believed that a synthesis of the two cultures would be furthered through science. Needham thought that such a synthesis would help realise what he called ‘the world co-operative commonwealth’, a global communist society that would be permeated by humane values nurtured in traditional Chinese society.</p>.<p>His idiosyncratic views and political passions thus inspired his seven-volume magnum opus, which is not just an exposition of Chinese science and technology, but to paraphrase the author himself, “a force within world history itself”.</p>.<p>Needham was criticised for his methodology, his Marxist premises, his understanding of Chinese culture, and his stubborn equation of science and technology. In particular, he was faulted for claims related to the comparative historical framework that he employed in his study.</p>.<p>In essence, his critics argued that though Needham’s starting point is that China and the West are antithetical, Science and Civilisation functions as a celebration of Chinese accomplishments and a critique of Western civilisation. Hence, it is worthwhile to understand the broad pattern of Needham’s historical thought for three reasons: First, Needham never shied away from bold generalisations, despite some outdated concepts and a few unsupported assertions, his rendering of world history is remarkable for its synoptic view. He never focuses on individual States but places Chinese, Indian, Islamic and Western achievements within the context of the reciprocity of Eurasian cultures.</p>.<p>Second, Science and Civilisation will likely be an influential work for a long time to come; historians have barely begun to mine the rich material contained in it.</p>.<p>Finally, the most compelling value of Needham is that he was convinced of the essential unity of all peoples; dedicated his life to breaking down cultural barriers, and to proclaiming the lesson that “Wisdom was not born with the Europeans”. He embraced the religion, science and philosophy of the East and West in equal measure.</p>.<p>Science and Civilisation begins with a fundamental question, one that is relevant to India as much as to China: Despite impressive intellectual traditions, a secular and composite culture, scientific curiosity, and substantial technological skill, why did China fail to make the breakthrough to experimental and mathematical science and hence to the industrial revolution? However, as Needham’s work progressed, the question was redefined to: Why did modern science begin in the West and not in China?</p>.<p>Needham brings uncommonly strong political convictions to historical scholarship and, somewhat like Arnold Toynbee, his view of world history is permeated by a sense of prophetic destiny. In attempting to answer these questions, Needham brings forth the remarkable scientific advances made by China in diverse fields. However, his writing says more about his faith in the transformative power of ideas than it does about historical realities in China. It is almost as if his China stands outside history, with no place for the unruly complexity of history or for changes over time and space.</p>.<p>It is challenging to read the multi-volume Science and Civilisation, but you could read an equally engaging book that provides a synoptic profile of the eccentric Cambridge Don; and succinctly presents the essence of his worldview. The biography of Joseph Needham, The Man Who Loved China, by Simon Winchester tells the beguiling story of Joseph Needham, Dorothy Moyle, and Lu-Gwei Djen; as also the composition of Science and Civilisation in China, in absorbing detail.</p>.<p>Despite its flaws, Science and Civilisation is an extraordinary achievement. In the backdrop of an expansionist China that remains a closed society with no democracy in sight, Needham’s work, perhaps ironically, provides a critique of China and points to the one answer that seems to have eluded him: Democracy and an open society are necessary conditions for the progress of science and society. Two values that China and its people desperately need; values that separate India from China that we must therefore persevere to preserve.</p>