this is mine…

I guess it seems strange to me to cast aspersions on ancient boat-builders when there’s no way they could have had the detailed understanding of shear that we possess today through computer-aided models…

I’m no enemy of science - though I don’t see it a the end-all of knowledge. People must understand the technologies being used around them. One of the biggest problems we face today is the shallow understanding of science and mathematics among a majority of the populace (at least here in the US). It makes banking scams, credit card debt, and diet pills much more prevalent than they might otherwise be.

Thanks for the clarification, David! I’ll definitely check out that book!

As for a communication breakdown, there wasn’t one as such. Dynamic wind loads on a building are less than for a ship in water. Although diagonals were used in the arched structures of gothic cathedrals, but this was to balance inward and outward dead loads rather that dynamic ones. In Wells Cathedral for example, masonry cross bracing was used to stop the building collapsing inwards after overdoing the buttressing which was supposed to stop it falling apart. A masonry diagonal is no use in a dynamic structure since it falls apart in tension.

Buildings were all about compression stresses whereas boats need to consider tension and compression. To summarize, there is almost nothing a boat builder can learn from a stone mason.

As for bankers, well the problem is that finance has been based upon deterministic closed systems when the science points heavily to chaotic open ones - but that’s a whole other story, I guess.

The general point is that a reaction against science has been fashionable for the last 30 years, perhaps now is the time to throw out feng shui along with the alchemy of collateral default swaps.

First, I think that it’s sad that craftsmanship in general is looked down upon these days. “Fine art,” “science,” etc., hold their weight against these more practical technologies, that are more relevant in ages and places where function is more important than form.

But second, I think the interesting question raised is - why didn’t the old ship-makers know about shear? Where was the breakdown in cross-communication between ship architects and building architects?

And where are the communication breakdowns today?