• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Darwin's Illusion

Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
LIIA said:
Al-Ghazali was not a fundamentalist, he was an Islamic philosopher/polymath, the same article said, “the golden age did not slow down after al-Ghazali, who lived in the 11th century, while others extend the golden age to around the 16th to 17th centuries.”

Islamic Golden Age - Wikipedia

al-Ghazali - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Once again the links that you post refute you. You may not know this, but revivalism tends to be a fundamentalist movement. And the article describes him as such. His key work that they listed indicates that he was a science denier:

Incoherence of the PhilosophersEdit​

Al-Ghazali's 11th century book titled The Incoherence of the Philosophers marks a major turn in Islamic epistemology. The encounter with skepticism led al-Ghazali to investigate a form of theological occasionalism, or the belief that all causal events and interactions are not the product of material conjunctions but rather the immediate and present will of God.
LIIA said:
Did I ever claim that the golden age continued to the 20th century? Don’t be pathetic, yes, it ended much earlier than that, but it was not due to fundamentalism. Simply the true spirit of Islam is what gave rise to the golden age. After many centuries of the Islamic revelation, Muslims gradually stopped embracing the true spirit of Islam and the religious obligation to learn, read, write and disseminate knowledge and instead got corrupted through a materialistic endeavor to pursue wealth and power. The declination of the Islamic golden age was due to the declination of Islam itself. Do you understand?
Click to expand...

I never said that you did. And I disagree with your conclusion. The decline had its roots in Islam itself. You are still a victim of tat decline.
LIIA said:
Except that the context here is “open communication”. Don’t you get it? Go back and read #7742
Does “dogmatic hostility” imply “open communication” to you? Don’t be pathetic.
Click to expand...

Ease up on the projection please. The only dogmatic hostility has come from you. But, I do thank you for admitting that you are wrong again.
 
Polymath257

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
LIIA said:
Al-Ghazali was not a fundamentalist, he was an Islamic philosopher/polymath, the same article said, “the golden age did not slow down after al-Ghazali, who lived in the 11th century, while others extend the golden age to around the 16th to 17th centuries.”
Click to expand...
Absolutely, Al Ghazali was a fundamentalist: he thought that doing philosophy about Islam was anti-Islamic. In other words, thinking clearly about the faith is against the faith. That is one characteristic of a fundamentalist.

In fact, one of his basic ideas is that there is no such thing as cause and effect: there is only God's will. As such, the very essence of scientific investigation is denied as un-Islamic. This had an entirely negative effect on subsequent intellectual life.

Also, it is hardly the case that the golden age extended to the 17th century. The intellectual innovations of the early centuries (up to the 9th century) were mostly done by non-muslims. When Islam took a firmer hold, the advances in math and science stagnated. Of course, the mongol destruction of Baghdad and the Bayt al Hikma was a major blow as well. After that, the primary advances in math and science were done in mongol lands, not in the heart of Islam. If you include their work, you *might* be able to argue that intellectual advances happened in Islamic lands up to about the 14th century, but that is really pushing it.

Sure, the Ottoman empire had some military successes after that (including the destruction of the Byzantine empire), but intellectual creativity had already died.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Dan From Smithville said:
That is a common trend in these discussions and debates. Attack the science. Attack people. Rinse and repeat. From the evidence, discussion, exchange, learning, valid arguments well-supported and logic are of no apparent interest to the campaign. There is no valid scientific alternative promoted. To date, no such position has been revealed to exist to promote.

I don't see the positions represented against science to be anything more than the traditional creationist position. All the old tactics, terms and treatments are there. Just on higher volume and heavier rotation.
Click to expand...
Yes, and what they don't seem to realize is that it makes their religious' position appear to be ludicrous, thus instead of defending religion, they make it seem like an exercise in ignorance.
 
Dan From Smithville

Dan From Smithville

He who controls the spice controls the universe.
Staff member
Premium Member
Audie said:
What does prolonging this skunk- war accomplish?
Click to expand...
I often ask myself that question. It isn't as if the opposition is here to learn something or offer a scientifically valid alternative based on the evidence.
 
Dan From Smithville

Dan From Smithville

He who controls the spice controls the universe.
Staff member
Premium Member
John53 said:
The Illuminati keep the news suppressed. Or maybe it's the Lizard People.
Click to expand...
That whole lizard people thing is a new one for me. I'm just dazzled that people can espouse this sort of stuff with a straight face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top