- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
This is an excellent article that clearly states the fundamental obstacles that cripple research and scientific progress in the Islamic world. Three points need to be emphasized -
1) No scientific doctrine that conflicts with the Quran can be allowed in an Islamic society. The Quran is considered the literal word of God and therefore cannot be wrong. Finding fault here would have major theological consequences that are not present in Christian or Jewish societies, since the Bible or Torah were considered to be written by men (with their interpretation faults). Islamic Hadiths (sayings of the prophet) have a similar safety valve since Mohammed once indicated that he could be wrong in the area of physical observations (science). But the Quran is different - and the words there set the boundaries of any "Islamic Science" in stone. Evolution and Quantum randomness are not welcome doctrines in Islamic thought.
2) The Reformation in Christian Europe allowed the separation of science and religion in a way unthinkable to Islamic philosophy by removing religious control from basic inquiry. This was not the intent of the Reformation, but it was a major consequence, since even the most devout scientists of the time were forced to wrestle with the conflicts between their faith and their discoveries. Christianity already had the seeds of secular and religious separation in its basic doctrine ("Render unto Caesar") - the Reformation removed the hand of the Church from control of science. Islamic Society never can have this level of separation due to the tight integration of religion, law and politics.
3) Greek and Medieval inquiry opened the door to the scientific method of theory, empirical testing and proof, but it was not rigorous science as we know it today. There is a huge debt to Islamic thinkers for preserving much of the Greek thought through the dark ages and passing it back to Europe with their additions and observations. But brilliance in one area does not translate to validity in all - witness Isaac Newton's writings on Alchemy as the proof that being a genius does not mean that you cannot get things spectacularly wrong too. We all stand on the shoulders of those that came before in advancing knowledge - but sometimes, our supports only have a narrow shaft of truth.
One final point - Science is about open inquiry and restricting it to an "Islamic" or "Western" perspective will always result in a stunted outlook. This is not to say that one cultures' morality may make certain fields of endeavor more difficult or restrictive - think of cloning humans specifically for spare parts as a area where Western morality would inhibit inquiry. If there is to be an "Islamic science" - then perhaps it might be able to better operate with disapproval rather than restriction.
Using science to justify religion will always be a fools' endeavor. And until the Islamic world learns to separate the physical from the spiritual, they will never truly be able to ask the questions that have led to the blossoming of the western scientific method of the present day.
