當有人問nasa為什麼探索太空，nasa用了明朝做了靶子

使用CN2/CN2GIA顶级线路，支持Shadowsocks/V2ray科学上网，支持支付宝付款，每月仅需 5 美元

## 加入品葱精选 Telegram Channel ##

https://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/Why_We_01pt1.html

Ming China

There is a value judgment in that last sentence – that xenophobia and isolation are bad, but that they are in fact bad, I think, is borne out by history. The case most often cited for a societal decision not to explore – with generally recognized bad effects – is Ming China in the 15th century. You will find this case, for example, made in Bob Zubrin’s books on Mars, and before that made by NASA Administrator James Beggs. Is it hype, or is it history?

Some day historians will be writing about whether or not WE chose wisely, not only to make a proposal to explore, but also to fund it.
The historical facts are quite clear. Historian Daniel Boorstin – the recently deceased Librarian of Congress – pointed out that in the early 15th century the biggest Chinese ships were up to ten times the size of Columbus’s later in the century. While Columbus had 17 ships and 1500 men on the largest of his four expeditions, the Chinese Admiral Zheng He had 317 ships and 27,000 crewmen on the first of his six expeditions. Following a maritime tradition stretching back to the 11th century, from 1405-1433, these ships plied the seas of Southeast Asia, sailed to India, the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea and down the East Coast of Africa. (And yes, these are the voyages that Gavin Menzies addressed in his book 1421: The Year China Discovered America, although in my view that claim is not supported by good evidence.)

But what is important is this. Although Chinese state revenues were probably 100 times Portugal’s, after the 1430s the Ming emperors had other priorities, and it was the Portuguese and other European countries that led the way in exploration. As Boorstin noted “When Europeans were sailing out with enthusiasm and high hopes, land-bound China was sealing her borders. Within her physical and intellectual Great Wall, she avoided encounter with the unexpected …. Fully equipped with the technology, the intelligence, and the national resources to become discoverers, the Chinese doomed themselves to be discovered.”

In their recent world history, historians J. R. and William McNeill come to the same conclusions, and historians in general tend to agree that the Chinese chose poorly in the mid-15th century. By the 1470s, the McNeils wrote, even the skills needed to build great ships were lost. Boorstin called the withdrawal of the Chinese into their own borders, symbolized by the Great Wall of China that took its current form at that time, “catastrophic … with consequences we still see today.” The parallel with what is happening now, despite renewed attempts at space exploration, is striking. Some day historians will be writing about whether or not WE chose wisely, not only to make a proposal to explore, but also to fund it.

品葱用户 琉璃光 评论于 2020-08-05

以古諷今太甚，失論史之道。道理正確，但史例錯誤，明朝不是共朝，明朝始終(整體)領先全球，士人庶民之水準亦非中共國人所能企及。此恕不詳論詳答。三人行必有吾師焉。知其正確道理，固步自封必衰，可矣。

品葱用户 **lastdayinfront

琉璃光** 评论于 2020-08-05

[

以古諷今太甚，失論史之道。道理正確，但史例錯誤，明朝不是共朝，明朝始終(整體)領先全球，士人庶民之水…

]( “/article/item_id-461402#”)
东厂和锦衣卫就是明朝的吧

品葱用户 Dk2s 评论于 2020-08-06

農耕文明是無法征服任何其他文明的

人類的歷史已經一遍又一遍的證明

小農經濟的型態缺乏對外擴張的誘因及實力

品葱用户 亞洲天王東方不敗 评论于 2020-08-05

大明獄、還有輸給滿州野豬皮！

而且這種吹捧有吊用，反襯本文論點正確

再先進固步自封也是遲早完蛋(就像明朝）

縱使一時落後也要銳意進取，就像二戰後日本

大陸？開始衰敗了！基本完蛋

品葱用户 未定义字符串 评论于 2020-08-06

這事情有趣之處在文外——在中美對抗的大環境下才會誕生這種“反思”中國歷史的文章，真是明嘲暗諷，大陰陽師

品葱用户 **亞洲天王東方不敗

未定义字符串** 评论于 2020-08-05

[

這事情有趣之處在文外——在中美對抗的大環境下才會誕生這種“反思”中國歷史的文章，真是明嘲暗諷，大陰陽…

]( “/article/item_id-461420#”)
這明嘲暗諷用的真妙

品葱用户 **未定义字符串

亞洲天王東方不敗** 评论于 2020-08-06

[

這明嘲暗諷用的真妙

]( “/article/item_id-461422#”)
還是NASA妙，找明朝例子一定是有中國通監修的！

品葱用户 太陽三觀測站 评论于 2020-08-05

文 化 輸 出
國 威 遠 揚

点击品葱原文参与讨论

最简单好用的 VPS,没有之一，注册立得 100 美金