Am I right when saying scientific advancements such as the Age

>>1351572
Europe never united under Christianity. Europe never united. The Romans kind of did it, Napoleon kind of did it.

Christianity helped bring about scientific advancement such as those in another way. The continual conflict over the faith brought such mad warfare to Europe that science simply had to progress. The age of Enlightenment happened because much of Europe broke away from the traditional Christian ideas.

>>1351572
>If not for that, then most European nations would be too separated and hostile due to the multitude of pagan religions each peoples after the Roman Empire fell had.
Sans pagan religions: literally what happened in europe during the 1500s to the 1600s, in which differences in Christian interpretation came to play.

>>1351572
Most European nations were too separate and hostile.

It's only after the two world wars do we see a united europe. OH WAIT NO, THERE WAS STILL THE COLD WAR.
So it's only today do we see a united euro-
>Brexit
Well shit, it was never united.

File: roman mother.png (704KB, 512x850px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 512x850px

The answer to this question lies in why did this events happen in Western Europe. I'm pretty sure it was thanks to Newton. Before Newton, European science was focused on the 'why' something existed, as in its purpose. They throw explanations like the balance of bodily fluids or that the reason why Earth was the center of the universe is because of humanity, etc. With Newton, the magic of the world was removed a replaced with mathematical formulas. I'm not saying Europeans before Newton were all superstitious and such but it owes much to Newton laying out the path of motivation by showing how the world can be described almost perfectly through formulas. Wouldn't you be motivated to explore the jungle if armed with a machete?

So then the question lies as to why Europe was able to produce Newton instead of somewhere else. That, I'm not too sure. Maybe its just coincidence?