Despite East Asians being as intelligent as Europeans, or moreso...

East Asia was always rather developed technologically. Japan was just particularly undeveloped because of their strict isolationist policies. China specifically has always been country of science and technology. China was ahead of Europe in a lot of things even as recently as the 1600s, when the "great divergence" began.

At that time China and the rest of the East got swiftly overtaken by European technology because of the extreme speed of the Industrial Revolution and the time it took for information to spread. The exact reasons for the Great Divergence are a subject of some debate, and it's a rather complicated issue.

>>9068344
To be clear, the divergence started well before the industrial revolution but that was what made the differences balloon so much

File: 51Dw-5L2laL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (38KB, 333x499px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 333x499px

>>9068329
The development of science seems greatly influenced by the political systems in which science is generated. For a comparative study of Western, Islamic and Chinese science, and how politics was either a contribution or a detriment to their development, read pic related.

>>9068329
>Is Confucius and their delving into spiritualism to blame?
Confucianism was to blame, but it had nothing to do with spiritualism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-level_equilibrium_trap

>>9068344
>>9068347
Thank you for the concise answer.
Interesting change of destiny though.

>>9068348
I'll try and find myself a copy, thanks.

>>9068364
I thought so.
Thank you for confirming, anon.

The scientific method is a concept that didn't exist in China. The East was very well develop but note a lot of discoveries at the time happened by chance and there wasn't really a system rigorous study of science until the scientific method.

They had vast amount of knowledge but no real scientific methods to speaks of. They wrote a LOT of observations down when testing new medicines, for example, and through observation they could gather what worked and what didn't, but their explanations for why were mostly spiritual in nature.

File: sftfi1{image3}.gif (5KB, 462x347px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 462x347px

low std dev, less retards but also less geniuses (geniuses drive progress)

>>9068329
not to forget that china was on a civil wars, and separatist rebellions lot of times which made china focus on its own unity more than scientific discovery and the Chinese weren't really open with foreigns before.

fun fact: the gunpowder was an accidental discovery by some alchemist who was trying to create "magic" to cure diseases

File: 1501121818241.jpg (67KB, 400x288px)

67KB, 400x288px

>>9070952
Where would Europe and the west be without those with that PHENOTYPE

>>9068329
According to /sci/, the asians could not have been as smart as the europeans because they didn't do the smart things the europeans did.

Its all the evidence you need to show that asians had a lower iq than europeans at that time.

>>9068329
Europe had two important leaps forward that made the whole different:
- the age of enlightenment: moved power out from religion and later on to the people. East Asia had stronger central powers.

- industrial revolution: everything was in place in England and with the subsequent revolution in transport (steam rather than sail) the rest of Europe joined in. East Asia was more feudal.

>>9068329
It is one of the emperor that decided to close off China from the rest of the world.

>>9070952
This is what happens when you have an incestuous scholarly elite chosen for their academic ability, and leave the peasants in the dust.

Western society is more stable because it didn't suck all non-halfwits into a stagnant bureaucracy. Intelligence was rewarded in other fields, geniuses didn't get isolated from the general population and interbred with them.