Comments on: How Muslim Theologians Saved Islamic Science

By: James

James — Thu, 22 Oct 2015 22:12:29 +0000

This conjunction also obtained in Christianity, namely, in Calvinism, which spurred the growth of the modern world (via America, Britain, and the Netherlands) in science, art, politics, and economics. Science being seen as a singularly divine activity, that is. However, in Calvinism, the doctrine that ‘God makes kings’ specifically precludes the Church from interfering with the State, or from interfering with Science, or vice versa. No such doctrine existed in Ghazali, Ibn Khaldun, or any of the great Islamic philosopher-theologians; in fact, it was the opposite. There are extended arguments that Khaldun and Ghazali had to hide the ‘true meaning’ of their philosophies, leaving clues through textual items like repetition or discontinuity, while leaving a ‘surface teaching’ that was amenable to the religious and political authorities of the time. The same thing occurred in Maimonides, and other great non-Muslim thinkers who lived in Islamic Spain during the golden age. To be a philosopher was to be suspected of crimes implicit, if not actual, which is why Islamic culture, even in the golden age, did so little with their heritage from Greece, while Christian Europe flowered into the Renaissance and Enlightenment after they obtained these texts through the crusades. Algebra, geometry, optics, Aristotelian philosophy, surely, but these were relatively minor and safe areas of inquiry, not Copernican revolutions.

By: loveprophet

loveprophet — Tue, 23 Dec 2014 12:10:56 +0000

JazakAllah khair for the article. I’ve waited for some time to see someone link Hume’s inductive problem of science with the Ash’ari view.
The inductive problem really shows that science is based on faith and that it can’t operate logically unless God is added to the equation.

By: Macksood

Macksood — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 16:17:33 +0000

In regards to evolution, I don’t think Ghazali would consider such evidence to reach the epistemic status of Burhan. However, instead of trying to literally match up the stories of creation of man in the Quran with Science, in my understanding, Ghazali’s primary concern with regards to the theory would be to ask, does it (implicitly or explicitly) undermine any essential concepts of Islamic belief? If so, then how can the scientific data be understood within an Islamic worldview?

By: Talha

Talha — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 17:26:10 +0000

In light of the approach towards divine revelation given above, how should we view evolution? Evolution has been studied, observed, experimented upon, and adjusted according to scientific evidence for over a hundred years, and seems to be the most coherent and comprehensive explanation of the diversity of living organisms on earth. Has it reached the epistemic status of burhan? If not, what are the requirements for an idea to be considered burhan? I personally don’t know any classical tafseer of the Quran which takes a figurative approach when commenting on ayaat regarding the creation of prophet Adam, peace be upon him. Do we know how the salaf understood such ayaat?

By: Maria

Maria — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:27:36 +0000

MasyaaAllah!!! I was searching for this earlier today, and there you are, on this blessed Friday night! Alhamdulillah!
I’ve been searching for stories about our medeival Islamic scientists but have been looking at wrong places. Western historians have difficulties grasping what empowers Muslim scientists, as they do not understand the power of the Quran in igniting the curiosity and thirst of knowledge among the readers.
Am searching for sources written by Muslims.

By: Alkanemy

Alkanemy — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 13:46:01 +0000

Truely, the only religion recognized by Allah is Islam. May Allah have mercy on Imam Ghazali.