Science and the Islamic world—The quest for rapprochement

[Tjanaparh]

I think the countries of central Asia You mentioned have all a comon other disease.

[Khostai]

acting as if secularism is the saving grace of intellectual progress in the islamic world is not honest. the islamic "golden era" thrived a 1000 years ago under islamic law, the kind of society that would make liberals of today hate muslims even more. if it were a simple matter of islamic fundamentalists keeping the muslim world backwards, than we would see all the "istans" besides afghanistan and pakistan excelling in these fields. the truth is that they don't, even with their near 100% literacy rates.

take iran for example, its post islamic revolution contribution to science and technology far surpasses its pre revolution past under the secular shah.

I think its more about the investment that the current goverment does.
If you speand more money on science you will get more inovation, its not about how Islamic one country is.
But one thing I don't understand, most of you don't find Iran Islamic and peopel always say that the sharia there is not the good one. But still when something positive comes out there you point to Iran and say look how good Islamic goverment is -_-.

[tor_khan]

I think its more about the investment that the current goverment does.
If you speand more money on science you will get more inovation, its not about how Islamic one country is.
But one thing I don't understand, most of you don't find Iran Islamic and peopel always say that the sharia there is not the good one. But still when something positive comes out there you point to Iran and say look how good Islamic goverment is -_-.

A few things stand in Iran's favour if you like. Historically Persians made significant contributions to Arabic as well as Farsi literature which they exported. In that regard they have been aware and responsive towards learning and literature. In addition they have been willing to interpret and reinterpret religion to fit their culture. Islam is a common rallying point but their form of Islam is also used to separate them from the rest of the Muslim world. They know this and they continue to use this in all fields of society.

Iran is not the only country that chooses to make a political point out of any achievements or advancement. They are also not hungry as Pakistan or Afghanistan and can choose to focus on science and technology and justify this within their interpretation of Islam.

[Admin Khan]

I think Muslim Scientists in the west are on the rise. Take a look at most higher educational websites in the US, and you'd be shocked to not find a bunch of Muslim scientists engaged in ground-breaking research scenarios. The reason why Muslim dominated countries can't produce is because of foreign-meddling and instability, such problems should not be attributed to religion.

[randolph85]

But one thing I don't understand, most of you don't find Iran Islamic and peopel always say that the sharia there is not the good one. But still when something positive comes out there you point to Iran and say look how good Islamic goverment is -_-.

iran is not a vangaurd of shariah and its mistakes are many but there is no denying that the leadership is conservative. the same people who order women to be veiled are the same ones ordering research into such fields such as nano tech.

[khushal]

Iran produces one of the highest rate for female PHDs in the world.

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

acting as if secularism is the saving grace of intellectual progress in the islamic world is not honest. the islamic "golden era" thrived a 1000 years ago under islamic law, the kind of society that would make liberals of today hate muslims even more. if it were a simple matter of islamic fundamentalists keeping the muslim world backwards, than we would see all the "istans" besides afghanistan and pakistan excelling in these fields. the truth is that they don't, even with their near 100% literacy rates.

take iran for example, its post islamic revolution contribution to science and technology far surpasses its pre revolution past under the secular shah.

That's actually not very accurate at all. The sort of society that you had in the Medieval Middle-East would utterly shock the modern Talib, Saudi, Salafi, Iranian cleric and Pakistani nationalist. You just have to look at their works on philosophy and their admiration for the Greek way of thinking to gauge how opened-minded their great thinkers were..

In fact, ibn Rushd's upholding of Greek logic was refuted not through a fatwa or death-threats but by a book written by the more orthodox Imam Ghazali. Ibn Rushd responded by writing another book. Moreover, ibn Haitham and ibn Sina deduced truths not from scripture but from what we now know as the scientific method. Compare them with our modern zombies of Harun Yahya.

Modern Muslims are the equivalent of the Medieval Europeans, who refused to accept that the sun was at the center of the solar system.

Iran is following in the footsteps of the Shah. The Shah thought he could have a modern 'European' society without giving the masses their freedom. The Ayatollahs now believe that they can have a scientific society whilst severely subduing the people's desire for freedom. It will end in failure.

[JattApache]

Science>Religion

[Friend]

Science>Religion

True but Islam is superior to all other isms and sciences.

[JattApache]

True but Islam is superior to all other isms and sciences.

Science>all

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I think Muslim Scientists in the west are on the rise. Take a look at most higher educational websites in the US, and you'd be shocked to not find a bunch of Muslim scientists engaged in ground-breaking research scenarios. The reason why Muslim dominated countries can't produce is because of foreign-meddling and instability, such problems should not be attributed to religion.

also something called "brain drain"

[RevolutionThroughReason]

True but Islam is superior to all other isms and sciences.

can a Mullah with no scientific knowledge cure cancer, travel to the moon, make a place once desert into a lush vegetated region?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

That's actually not very accurate at all. The sort of society that you had in the Medieval Middle-East would utterly shock the modern Talib, Saudi, Salafi, Iranian cleric and Pakistani nationalist.

What Randolph is saying is that this all happened under the framework of Shari'ah Law


Which is true, whether the Sa'udis, Talibs or whoever else you mention would be accepting of the interpretation of the Shari'ah they had in place, is another issue.

Al-Akam Al-Sultaniyah is an accurate historical document which details the Islamic Legal System in place during the Golden Era which housed Ibn Haytham and Ibn Rushd. There was an Islamic Penal System, which is the main anathema most modern secularists have with Islamic Law. Veiled women were giving lectures at Bayt Al Hikmah and determining prices in Baghdad.

The problem we have is that both Hardcore Fanatics and Secularists from the Muslim world are seeing our own history from Post-Colonial eyes. rather than the eyes of the times.

I don't think it is a fair characterization that Muslims of today are like the Mideival Europeans; the Medieval Europeans were not in a Post Colonial Time where they were trying to retain their central zeitgeist while meeting the challenges of advancing in the world.

[Khostai]

^You must not forget, that medievel Europe was once colonised by Rome. Once Romes power was gona all those north European countries were independant, and also the knowledge and art work that was brought by romans was gone. And the dark ages began.
The same whith Muslims of today, they were colonised, after colonisation some time they had the same style as during colonisation( secular goverments). But that is going down and we are entering dark ages now.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

To say Rome colonized Europe is not just a misrepresentation, it is inaccurate. Romans were Europeans and it presided over Europeans. Rome did colonize in the B.C. era but this was BEFORE Christianity and at that time Romans were too decadent to care about trying to control the cultures and societies of Ancient Europe. Hence Visigoths remained Visgoths and Greeks remained Greeks. Roman influence changed in medeival times, they represented the mainstream cultural zeitgeist of Europe and this remained the case until MODERN times. Rome only ceased being a powerful influence in the LAST century. England did get rid of Rome earlier on, but THEN they started taking authority/influence from The Church of England, which the King of England was head of. The Russians never had Roman influence, they were influenced under the Russian Orthodox Church and it retained its influence UNTIL the end of the Czarist era which was the start of Bolshevik Revolution.

So Europe retained their respective influences for centuries.....the main change was that during this time, Europe started colonizing and expanding their influenced of where they can exploit. This catapulted Europes increase of raw materials which drove the industrial revolution, which would not have been possible without it. And in the process demarcated the rest of the world.

The current world economy is a Post Colonial World economy, and that's what Muslims are up against. Saudi Arabia with all of its oil, is NOT even in control of its own oil, it's under the control of North American oil producers. Iran is embargoed. So Europe's progress had little or nothing to do with Rome losing influence, and our decline has little to do with Islamic influence.