What Islamic Science and Philosophy?

The American Thinker ^ | December 01, 2006 | Jonathan David Carson

[Northern Alliance]

We know that we are being lied to. Sometimes we just don't realize how much we are being lied to.

The more sordid the Islamic present seems, the more we are told of the glories of the Islamic past. And the most glorious of the glories of Islam, the most enlightened of its enlightenments, are the "Islamic science" and "Islamic philosophy" of the Golden Age.

So what does Islamic law say about this science and this philosophy? According to Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 1368), they are unlawful, serious affronts to Islam, a form of apostasy. Apologists for Islam in the West brag about the "Islamic science" and "Islamic philosophy" that their accomplices in the Islamic world condemn.

Reliance of the Traveller lists the following sorts of "unlawful" knowledge:

(1) sorcery

(2) philosophy

(3) magic

(4) astrology

(5) the sciences of the materialists

(6) and anything that is a means to create doubts

The term "sciences of the materialists" requires explanation. It does not mean, as one might think, science that is based on the assumption that matter (and energy) is the sole constituent of the universe. Jews and Christians might agree that such "sciences of the materialists," if not "unlawful," at least present a truncated view of reality, omitting as they do the spiritual realm. It means, rather, according to the commentary of Reliance of the Traveller, the "conviction of materialists that things in themselves or by their own nature have a causal influence independent of the will of Allah. To believe this is unbelief that puts one beyond the pale of Islam."

At issue here is not the existence of the spiritual realm, but the condemnation by al-Ghazali in The Incoherence of the Philosophers of "the judgment of the philosophers," first of all Avicenna,

"that the connection that is observed to exist between causes and effects is a necessary relation, and that there is no capability or possibility of bringing the cause into existence without the effect, nor the effect without the cause."

Causes and effects are inadmissible, according to al-Ghazali, because causes limit the absolute freedom of Allah to bring about whatever events he wills. Effects are brought about, not by causes, but by the direct will of Allah.

We see then that the condemnation of "the sciences of the materialists" and the condemnation of philosophy are really the same condemnation and that the condemnation of "the sciences of the materialists" is a condemnation of far more than secular science, extending as it does to any analysis of causes and effects, whether materialist or not. It extends even to any discussion of the nature of any object, whether material or spiritual, because the nature of an object conditions how it affects and is affected by other objects. So in the end the condemnation of "the sciences of the materialists" is a condemnation of any effort to understand anything.

Averroes replied to The Incoherence of the Philosophers in The Incoherence of the Incoherence, so al-Ghazali, whose views inform Reliance of the Traveller in particular and mainstream Islam in general, attacked Avicenna, one of the two greatest of the "Islamic philosophers," who was defended by the other, Averroes.

And we are told by the entire decrepit establishment that we should honor the "Islamic philosophy" of the Golden Age!

There is, however, a still closer connection between the philosophy and "the sciences of the materialists" declared unlawful by Reliance of the Traveller. Without a notion of cause and effect, science is impossible, and the acceptance by Islam of al-Ghazali's views meant that science in the Islamic world could develop only in opposition to a fundamental tenet of Islam.

If the true cause of events is the will of Allah, and if the will of Allah is inscrutable, then the causes of events are inscrutable and science a vain pursuit. The issue is ultimately whether the universe and its creator are in any way intelligible. The West, with its traditions of natural law and natural theology, agrees for the most part that the universe is astonishingly intelligible and God somewhat so. Islam, at least at its most rigorous, denies any intelligibility whatsoever to either.

The seriousness of the condemnation of philosophy and science by Reliance of the Traveller can be seen in its list of "Acts That Entail Leaving Islam." Belief "that things in themselves or by their own nature have any causal influence independent of the will of Allah" is apostasy.

In contrast, the Jewish and Christian worlds have been informed by the notion of secondary causes propounded by Moses Maimonides and Saint Thomas Aquinas. God works, at least most of the time, through the laws of nature, via causes. Just as our wills can be both free and subject to God, and divine foreknowledge does not foreclose the contingency of earthly events, God and nature cooperate in the production of effects.

Thus, nature both has its own laws and remains subject to the will of God. The laws of nature place no limitation on the freedom of God, and science can investigate natural causes without trespassing in the divine realm. Indeed, science, by investigating the operations of nature, simultaneously elucidates divine providence. Far from being "unlawful," science is, in this view, completely compatible with the worship of God, indeed more than simply compatible because it is the product of a desire to know God, a desire even for a divine intimacy.

There are two Bibles, as it were, Holy Scripture and the Book of Nature. The heavens declare the glory of God, and the things that are unseen are known by the things that are seen. That science as an institution has been corrupted by bad philosophy and worse theology in no way negates the fundamental compatibility of true science and true religion.

The importance of "occasionalism," the doctrine that events are brought about by the direct will of God, not by natural causes, for Islam and for the West's differences with it is emphasized in the following statement of Majid Fakhry:

In fact it is no exaggeration to say that a number of distinctively Islamic notions such as fatalism, utter resignation to God, the surrender of personal endeavour, belief in the unqualified transcendence of God, etc., cannot be fully understood except in the perspective of the occasionalist world-view. (Islamic Occasionalism)

This doctrine is at the heart of Islam. Avicenna, Averroes, Maimonides, and Aquinas warned us against it, but now university, scientific establishment, media, State Department, and even corporate America, elites of every sort, pretend that Avicenna and Averroes are the paragons of Islamic philosophy and Maimonides and Aquinas their best pupils and thus in debt to Islam. If we are going to escape humiliation, madness, and death, we are going to have to educate ourselves and fight for even the simplest and most obvious of truths. The establishment is certainly not going to do it for us.

Contact Jonathan David Carson, Ph.D. For more information, see his Website

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

The Muslim world is to be credited with helping preserve much of the knowledge of the Roman Empire, though they are also at least partially responsible for the complete fall of that empire. The number system comes from them (although it is traceable to India). While much of Europe was in the thrall of the Dark Ages (there were advances during that time, but it was a technological dark age, and many skills--how to make cement, for example--were lost), Muslim controlled Iberia thrived.

Give credit where credit is due. Even bad guys can be intelligent and can make contributions to the world.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

What Islamic Science and Philosophy?

The improvised explosive device (IEDs).

[saganite]

Even if the Muslims preserved knowledge in Spain they were at best placeholders until the West could recover from it's own bout of madness. Credit where credit may be due but no kudos for advancing science and the arts.

[BelegStrongbow]

I believe this is correct. The West reacted against its own Classical past, which Islam did not have to contend with. However, it should be noted that a good number ot texts turned up in Western monasteries, many fewer than we would like, but the tide of barbarism in the West had swept much away, not all.

[Young Werther]

The basis for Muslim knowledge? During that first rush of conquest they swept across the Middle East, North Afica and Spain where they met their match at Tours in 763.

Part of their entourage were Jewish slaves who "took care of the housekeeping." When the "Moors" were driven out of Spain by the "Cid" They left behind their Jewish slaves and the classical books and knowledge that the Jewish people had preserved. Yes Muslim scholars would invent the concept of Zero and build upon classical mathematical texts but their contributions were insignificant considering they contributed to the "Dark Ages" and not to the "Age of Enlightenment"

These Jewish knowledge keepers would make their way to Northern Italy where they shared this knowledge with Tony Soprano's forebearers and the FIRST Uiversity was founded.

To this day the modus operandi is the same.

[Psycho_Bunny]

It's bizarre that islamics have a reputation for advancing science, philosophy and the arts when everyone has always known they only transmitted knowledge from earlier ages, adding to it very little that was new.

Even Lord Russell - the notorious, WWII pacifist twit he was - knew Mohammedism was all but useless, beyond being The Great Transcriber of Western Thought.

It's not too surprising, given the barbarity tolerated by islamic thought.

[dhuffman@awod.com]

Conservatives know, should know, that a stopped clock can be trusted to be correct for two fleeting instances per day. The progressives are continually tinkering with Islamic Science and Philosophy (among all other things) to try and make it less wrong always. Hence the phrase, 'the lesser of two evils.'

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns. NRA KMA

[tm61]

they have made enourmous leaps in the methods of chopping off infidel heads. where would this world be without that?

[sittnick]

A college prof I know had been working on translating Averroes from Latin into English. Averroes would be the rough equivalent of Aquinas (especially because of his employment of Aristotle Aristotles approach), however, the profs conclusion was that Averroes was veering into pantheism. It winds up being an almost inescapable result of the radical monotheism of religions like Islam. (note: my apostrophe key is not working)

[wodinoneeye]

I remember an argument I had with some islamic guy who mentioned a muslim scientist/mathematician's who measured the circumference of the earth to a good accuracy as an example of Islams great achievements. His mouth closed very quickly after I mentioned that a Greek had originated that experiment in its method and result more than a thousand years earlier.

Many if the achievements that the moslems claim, they inherited from the people they had conquered (Persian Egyptians, etc...)


they write sites like this
http://www.arabji.com/ArabEdu/Edu3.htm

The Zero was actually developed long before in India/Babylon/Greece and the Moslems appropriated it (for example)

http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/HistTopics/Zero.html

[megatherium]

You're right. The words algebra and algorithm come from the Arabic. Perhaps the wealth of the Islamic world from 900 to 1300 made it the leader in commerce and knowledge (much of which they inherited from the Byzantine Empire they partially conquered). The interesting question is, why did the high Islamic culture collapse and the Europeans rapidly overtake them, after 1300? I think this author gives good insight into that, it had to do with their beliefs about the value of what we now call science and its relationship to faith.

[KingArthur305]

Right on, I think that science and the wisdom and courage to question the natural world made the separation between the west and the islamic world possible.

[Buzwardo]

BTTT

[Eyes Unclouded]

There is a difference between conquering people and translating their works and claiming them as your own and actually innovation. Any society that become Islamic... within a few generations critical thinking which is a must for science, questioning of authority (or heresy) which is a must for philosophy, and generally most social progress will grind to a halt. This war isn't so much a war about USA or the West vs Islam its about the long term survival of the human race. If a global caliphate is established we'll all pray alot and pretend to be Arabs but you can forget any deep space exploration.

[Eyes Unclouded]

what have they done for us lately

[megatherium]

It's not a Muslim power that has a probe orbiting Saturn, an expensive and difficult undertaking motivated only by curiosity and love of science. Nor is it a Muslim power that is spending tens of billions of dollars on research into the life sciences. They will be glad to purchase the cures which our massive investment in science will lead to, but they will still accuse us of being decadent, immoral and controlled by the Jews.

[Eyes Unclouded]

That's Casini (sp) right? As the son of a PhD and a budding scientist myself Islam keeps me up at night.

[VOA]

What Islamic Science and Philosophy?

If Islam is some paragon of science and philosophy, they were
in the same way the staff of libraries must all be scientists and
philiosphers.
They kept books and treasures that finally fell into the hands of
"The West" and were put to good use.

I wonder if all these Islamo-friendly historians have ever done
a full historical survey of all the books and technical advances
that Islam placed on a pyre while taking substantial parts of
the world by the sword, with the spilling of buckets of blood.

[megatherium]

Yep, Cassini.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/main/index.html