>>/40410/
> have to say (who?) in here.
Everybody, I can't even think of an individual.
> be it mathematics, engineering, free thinking, religious tolerance, geography I think pretty much everything regress,
Maths was still studied in this era although much of what they studied from was Arabic(not Roman). Engineering is a funny old thing, there was not so much history of it in Europe to begin with, they didn't have thou thousands upon thousands of years of Stone structures that the Middle east and such did. However, The Italian states were actually still making large stone structures and the North did a bit it just had not developed so much but that development largely came internally. There was no Free thinking in Rome, Religion was only tolerated so long as it didn't interfere with the empire in anyway(also keep in mind that Ancient religion is fundamentally different to modern religion in that modern religions often state quite clearly that they are the one faith and nobody is to follow another). Even Geography, much of it is tied to location and trade, it's the reason that Arabs had such a good grasp of it.
> not to mention history is not linear, there can be golden ages and dark ages it's not a straight line like for example marx suggests
Technology and idea wise it kind of is at least in general it is.
> this pretty much disregard every other regression.
Not really, as I said, it's not like antiquity had an abundance of it and they were still copying and using ancient literature.
> why would you take entire antiquity? you take greco-roman heritage in the account and compare to them and when you compare you can see the dark ages.
Because they are all built on top of each other. Even Greco-Roman culture spans thousands of years.
> You know in antiquity many things were written it's just we barely know them and we know many of them thanks to other scripts refere them, they might be lost, they might be burn down by certain desert cult, smashing down the statues.
It's not just antiquity that has this issue, that certain desert cult does have crimes to answer for but also it's a large part of why much of it still exists, as I said, the monks never stopped copying and learning about it.
> Not to mention high literacy rate and free thinking is completely disregarded amongst other things.
If that was so important why are they writing so little?
> I'm not even going to point out why the high literacy rate if noone writes a thing, good luck claiming they learned how to read for graffitis.
That could easily be applied to antiquity as well, in both cases folk had different aims for reading and most were not writers.
> aristo socrates and pre-socrates thinkers pretty much disregared or forgotten. even aristo reintroduced in 1000's and this would have never happened if not for christianity and fall or WRE.
Amongst the mainstream maybe but it had not disappeared, there were still scholars reading it.
> I cringe I'm not gonna lie because this claim is simply absurd. Most inventions are already based on other inventions, claiming this is, I think clear way to say "I don't know how inventions work."
Okay what did Rome invent? And how was it based on Roman inventiveness? Yes inventions are built on inventions(and yet at the same time you mention that you also say 'why would you take entire antiquity?') but most of Roman inventions were not made that way, they saw a helmet the Gauls were wearing, a structure the Greeks had or a sword the Spanish had and just took it.