The thesis statement is this: If slavery enabled the industrial revolution, why didn't slavery kick it off 3000 BCE in Africa (seeing that they had practically the same amount of math and science. One could aslo extend the argument to the greeks, Romans and even China (who were equal to Rome back then).
Please note that Newton's third law was known; if you check the Egyptian mystery system and the occult you will find it there: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction).
One possible argument could be that the Egyptian high priest (equivalent of scientists) knew but shunned it because of the dire consequences. The same way the Incas or mayaans (have to recheck) shunned the wheel because they saw it as bringing chaos. There is no evidence to support the shun argument on the Egyptians part (or not that I know of) but what I know is that the Greeks knew of atomic energy in the theoretical sense (saying that there was enough power in a stone to destroy a whole area).
Point is the industrial age did not start under the ancients and slavery was a mainstay at the time. So why?
Please note that Newton's third law was known; if you check the Egyptian mystery system and the occult you will find it there: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction).
One possible argument could be that the Egyptian high priest (equivalent of scientists) knew but shunned it because of the dire consequences. The same way the Incas or mayaans (have to recheck) shunned the wheel because they saw it as bringing chaos. There is no evidence to support the shun argument on the Egyptians part (or not that I know of) but what I know is that the Greeks knew of atomic energy in the theoretical sense (saying that there was enough power in a stone to destroy a whole area).
Point is the industrial age did not start under the ancients and slavery was a mainstay at the time. So why?
Comment