You're right, I had incorrectly said halted earlier, but attempted to correct for that, not quite enough perhaps. In terms of progress per-capita, how does it really compare though? To my knowledge at least, it was still very low for a long time. I could be wrong about that though.
I hear the "stand on the shoulders of giants" argument and everything though - but I think there's definitely at least some effect from the system that should be acknowledged.
> but I think there's definitely at least some effect from the system that should be acknowledged.
Oh I agree. I just don't think it is the sole reason for us being where we are.
The thing with technological progress (and by extension economic progress) is that it snowballs and grows exponentially.
If you took an early middle-age society and taught it the concepts of capitalism and they managed a seismic shift in their society to accommodate it, it would still take an incredibly long time for them to advance.
They might do it a bit quicker because people would be more free to spend and invest in what they wanted, and money would flow more freely, but they would still be limited by population and production power.
Population snowballs too, as does the sharing of knowledge that occurs alongside it and has probably been the number one driver of human progress.
I hear the "stand on the shoulders of giants" argument and everything though - but I think there's definitely at least some effect from the system that should be acknowledged.