| 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   |   
Islam/ Science?  
  
Saturday, December 15, 2007 
  I found 
this letter in a pakistani paper as very illuminating. This applies equally to 
Indian science.
 
 " WHY is it that for the last three hundred years, the Muslim world has been so 
deficient in producing scientists and philosophers? Why is it that even now when 
the Muslim world commands such immense resources, we lag so far behind the West 
in scholarship and technology?
 The answer is clear: for three hundred years, the door of Ijtihad that is 
creative thinking has been closed. Almost oneninth of the verses of the Quran 
stress ‘tafakkur’ and ‘tadabbur’.
 Yet, by and large, the Muslim world pays no heed to them, that is, they turn 
their back on critical thinking.
 Instead, we are fond of platitudes.
 We love clichés. We bask in the glory of the past. We dread the new, the 
original, and the novel. We revel in interpretations, but we flinch from 
creativity. We are good at repeating moth-eaten, time worn thoughts, views and 
traditions. Using Toynbee’s terminology, we are in the stranglehold of the 
‘nemesis of mimesis’. Intellectual stagnation and spiritual degeneration are our 
dismal lot.
 It is ingrained in our psychology that correct answers already exist, and are to 
be found in books or from authorities, religious or secular. Teachers disperse 
truth, parents are always right and leaders are omniscient. They act like 
philosopher kings, often uttering unchallenged banalities. Questioning authority 
is disrespectful and un-Islamic.
 It is time to deconstruct, following the true Quranic spirit of iconoclasm.
 Scholars may differ about problems concerning science, but they are unanimous as 
regards the need for a particular weltanschauung (world view) for the birth, 
growth and blossoming of science. Science cannot develop in an atmosphere 
vitiated by obscurantism, dogmatism, fanaticism, intolerance and irrationalism. 
Science needs an intellectual environment whose keynote is enlightenment with 
rationalism, pluralism and humanism as its driving forces.
 Historically it was the renaissance which prepared the ground for the emergence 
of modern science. The Dark Age which preceded the renaissance in Europe was 
dominated by scholasticism with philosophy as the handmaiden of theology. 
D’Alembert called scholasticism “the so called science of the centuries of 
ignorance”. The scholastics used to discuss such ‘profound’ problems as the 
number of angels who could dance on the tip of a needle. Bacon compared the 
scholastics to the spiders, content to weave cobwebs, ignoring the universe and 
what was happening around them.
 Scholasticism suffered from (i) indifference to facts (ii) arguments from 
authority (iii) undue emphasis on verbal subtleties (iv) reasoning in matters 
which observation alone could decide (v) blind faith.
 Modern science had to make way by routing scholasticism. It was Descartes 
(1596-1650) who performed this task. He was not only the founder of modern 
philosophy, but also, along with Galileo and Newton, one of the creators of 
modern science. He started off on his philosophical odyssey by the dictum: “In 
order to reach the truth, it is necessary, once in one’s life, to put everything 
in doubt.” Modern science has flourished in an atmosphere marked by 
philosophical skepticism. It does not take anything for granted. It puts to 
doubt all dogmas, all certainties. The beliefs of a scientist are tentative, not 
final. They are not based on authority, but on evidence. Modern science is 
iconoclastic in dealing with convictions based on tradition or authority. As 
opposed to scholasticism which believed in order to understand, modern science 
understands in order to believe. As such there is no dichotomy between modern 
science and the Quranic spirit, with its constant appeal to reasoning, thinking, 
knowing and deliberating: afala takaloon, afala tadabburoon, afala tafakkaroon.
 Science demands immense patience in observation and great boldness in framing 
hypotheses. The test of scientific truth is patient collection of facts combined 
with bold guessing as to the law binding facts together.
 Science demands an inquisitive spirit, a pioneering zeal and an enterprising 
élan. Science advances when there is unity between theory and practice. Any 
dichotomy between theory and practice spells disaster for scientific progress. 
The Greek science withered away, because it wholly and solely depended on 
deduction. Though the Greeks scaled the most sublime heights of speculative 
thought, their aversion to experimentation and manual work, closed the door for 
further scientific advancement.
 Induction was a great gift of Islam to humanity. “Neither Roger Bacon nor his 
later namesake has any title to be credited with having introduced the 
experimental method,” says Briffault in his book Making of Humanity, and adds, 
“The experimental method of Arabs was by Bacon’s time widespread and ea gerly 
cultivated throughout Europe.” According to Iqbal, “For purposes of knowledge, 
the Muslim culture fixes its gaze on the concrete and the finite.” He exalts the 
scientific spirit at the expense of speculative flights into metaphysics. By 
giving examples of Ibn-i-Khaldun’s view of history, Ibn-i-Maskwaih’s theory of 
life as evolutionary movement and Musa al-Khwarazmi’s shift from arithmetic to 
algebra, Iqbal concludes: “All lines of Muslim thought converge on a dynamic 
concept of the universe.” Thus Islam rejects a static view of the universe and 
regards it as always changing and evolving. According to the Quran, change is 
one of the greatest signs of God, and is explicitly implied in the verse: “Every 
day has its own glory.” The Islamic principle to keep pace with the changing 
world and an evolving universe is Ijtihad (exertion to form an independent 
opinion). Creativity is the essence of Ijtihad. The driving force of the 
scientific technological revolution (STR) is creativity, developing new ideas 
and sailing in uncharted seas.
 Science must precede technology, because science is the tree and technology is 
the fruit. Today, as never before, the political stability of a country depends 
on its economic prowess, which is determined by the STR.
 In order to usher in STR, we have to take the following steps:
 Firstly, our educational system must be geared to strengthen mathematics, 
physics, chemistry, and biology and computer science in our curriculum.
 Secondly, our method of teaching must change, emphasising the intelligent grasp 
of the subject rather than memorising formulas and theorems.
 Thirdly, our mass media must be mobilised to popularise science, and scientific 
thinking i.e. rational, critical and creative thinking.
 Fourthly, our scientists must be made to feel that the country stands in need of 
their leadership.
 Fifthly, there is an urgent need of structural change in our scientific 
institutions.
 Every genuine scientist must be encouraged by rapid promotions and handsome 
rewards. Our scientists serving abroad must be brought back home by offering 
them handsome salaries. The rotten concept of ‘seniority’ must be done away with 
to be replaced by the contribution made by a scientist, which is universally 
acknowledged. Lastly, what is most needed is the political will on the part of 
the government to regard literacy, education (in particular) and research as its 
first priority, and involve all scientists, educationists and the entire 
intelligentsia in carrying out this urgent task.
 for three hundred years, the doors of the tavern have been closed. — allama 
iqbal why is it that for the last three hundred years, the muslim world has been 
so deficient in pro- ducing scientists and phi- losophers? why is it that even 
now when the muslim world commands such immense resources, we lag so far behind 
the west in scholarship and technology? the answer is clear: for three hundred 
years, the door of ijtihad that is creative thinking has been closed. almost 
one- ninth of the verses of the quran stress ‘tafakkur’ and ‘tadabbur’. yet, by 
and large, the muslim world pays no heed to them, that is, they turn their back 
on critical thinking. instead, we are fond of platitudes. we love clichés. we 
bask in the glory of the past. we dread the new, the original, and the novel. we 
revel in interpretations, but we flinch from creativity. we are good at 
repeating moth-eaten, time worn thoughts, views and traditions. using toynbee’s 
ter- minology, we are in the strangle- hold of the ‘nemesis of mimesis’. 
intellectual stagnation and spiri- tual degeneration are our dismal lot. it is 
ingrained in our psycholo- gy that correct answers already exist, and are to be 
found in books or from authorities, reli- gious or secular. teachers dis- perse 
truth, parents are always right and leaders are omniscient. they act like 
philosopher kings, often uttering unchallenged ba- nalities. questioning 
authority is disrespectful and un-islamic. it is time to deconstruct, fol- 
lowing the true quranic spirit of iconoclasm. scholars may differ about problems 
concerning science, but they are unanimous as regards the need for a particular 
weltan- schauung (world view) for the birth, growth and blossoming of science. 
science cannot develop in an atmosphere vitiated by ob- scurantism, dogmatism, 
fanati- cism, intolerance and irrational- ism. science needs an intellectu- al 
environment whose keynote is enlightenment with rationalism, pluralism and 
humanism as its driving forces. historically it was the renais- sance which 
prepared the ground for the emergence of modern sci- ence. the dark age which 
prece- ded the renaissance in europe was dominated by scholasticism with 
philosophy as the handmai- den of theology. d’alembert called scholasticism “the 
so called science of the centuries of ignorance”. the scholastics used to 
discuss such ‘profound’ prob- lems as the number of angels who could dance on 
the tip of a nee- dle. bacon compared the scholas- tics to the spiders, content 
to weave cobwebs, ignoring the uni- verse and what was happening around them. 
scholasticism suffered from (i) indifference to facts (ii) argu- ments from 
authority (iii) undue emphasis on verbal subtleties (iv) reasoning in matters 
which obser- vation alone could decide (v) blind faith. modern science had to 
make way by routing scholasticism. it was descartes (1596-1650) who performed 
this task. he was not only the founder of modern phi- losophy, but also, along 
with galileo and newton, one of the creators of modern science. he started off 
on his philosophical odyssey by the dictum: “in order to reach the truth, it is 
necessary, once in one’s life, to put every- thing in doubt.” modern science has 
flourished in an atmosphere marked by phil- osophical skepticism. it does not 
take anything for granted. it puts to doubt all dogmas, all certain- ties. the 
beliefs of a scientist are tentative, not final. they are not based on 
authority, but on evi- dence. modern science is icono- clastic in dealing with 
convictions based on tradition or authority. as opposed to scholasticism which 
believed in order to under- stand, modern science under- stands in order to 
believe. as such there is no dichotomy be- tween modern science and the quranic 
spirit, with its constant appeal to reasoning, thinking, knowing and 
deliberating: afala takaloon, afala tadabburoon, afala tafakkaroon. science 
demands immense pa- tience in observation and great boldness in framing 
hypotheses. the test of scientific truth is pa- tient collection of facts 
combined with bold guessing as to the law binding facts together. science 
demands an inquisi- tive spirit, a pioneering zeal and an enterprising élan. 
science ad- vances when there is unity be- tween theory and practice. any 
dichotomy between theory and practice spells disaster for scien- tific progress. 
the greek science withered away, because it wholly and solely depended on deduc- 
tion. though the greeks scaled the most sublime heights of spec- ulative 
thought, their aversion to experimentation and manual work, closed the door for 
further scientific advancement. induction was a great gift of islam to humanity. 
“neither roger bacon nor his later name- sake has any title to be credited with 
having introduced the ex- perimental method,” says briffault in his book making 
of humanity, and adds, “the exper- imental method of arabs was by bacon’s time 
widespread and ea- gerly cultivated throughout europe.” according to iqbal, “for 
pur- poses of knowledge, the muslim culture fixes its gaze on the con- crete and 
the finite.” he exalts the scientific spirit at the ex- pense of speculative 
flights into metaphysics. by giving examples of ibn-i-khaldun’s view of history, 
ibn-i-maskwaih’s theory of life as evolutionary movement and musa al-khwarazmi’s 
shift from arithmetic to algebra, iqbal con- cludes: “all lines of muslim 
thought converge on a dynamic concept of the universe.” thus islam rejects a 
static view of the universe and regards it as always changing and evolving. 
according to the quran, change is one of the greatest signs of god, and is 
explicitly implied in the verse: “every day has its own glory.” the islamic 
principle to keep pace with the changing world and an evolving uni- verse is 
ijtihad (ex- ertion to form an in- dependent opin- ion). creativity is the 
essence of ijtihad. the driving force of the scientific technological revolu- 
tion (str) is creativity, develop- ing new ideas and sailing in un- charted 
seas. science must precede technol- ogy, because science is the tree and 
technology is the fruit. today, as never before, the polit- ical stability of a 
country depends on its economic prowess, which is determined by the str. in 
order to usher in str, we have to take the following steps: firstly, our 
educational system must be geared to strengthen mathematics, physics, chemistry, 
and biology and computer sci- ence in our curriculum. secondly, our method of 
teach- ing must change, emphasising the intelligent grasp of the sub- ject 
rather than memorising for- mulas and theorems. thirdly, our mass media must be 
mobilised to popularise sci- ence, and scientific thinking i.e. rational, 
critical and creative thinking. fourthly, our scientists must be made to feel 
that the country stands in need of their leader- ship. fifthly, there is an 
urgent need of structural change in our scien- tific institutions. every genuine 
scientist must be encouraged by rapid promo- tions and handsome rewards. our 
scientists serving abroad must be brought back home by offering them handsome 
salar- ies. the rotten concept of ‘senior- ity’ must be done away with to be 
replaced by the contribution made by a scientist, which is uni- versally 
acknowledged. lastly, what is most needed is the politi- cal will on the part of 
the govern- ment to regard literacy, educa- tion (in particular) and research as 
its first priority, and involve all scientists, educationists and the entire 
intelligentsia in carry- ing out this urgent task. "
 http://www.bodhtree.com/pressmart-->
 Posted by 
captainjohann at
Saturday, December 15, 2007    
http://captainjohann-johann.blogspot.com/2007/12/islam-science.html |