Do you think Islam as a religion has a thing to do with having many Muslims contributed in science?

[Kirran]

Oops I did it again. Sorry, I was sure I picked up that abbreviation here on RF!? PCMC is "politically correct, multi-culturalist".

My contention is that for the most part, the PCMC crowd has abandoned true liberal values which I think traditionally were closely aligned with secular humanism.

I am not entirely sure if I'd fall into this "crowd". I suppose I support the core ideas of political correctness, even if some of its expressions aren't ideal, as is to be expected. And I guess I support multiculturalism, although there are some values I'd like to see spread.

Are my values truly liberal values? Well, I'd say that in the true sense of the word they are, as in they are more libertarian, but that comes with being an anarchist. I'm certainly not an economic liberal, although one might call me a social liberal.

I guess I'm just saying I'm not sure how water-tight your definitions are.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Thru all the history of Islam.

... except for the last thousand years or so.

Apparently, there's some controversy about whether the end of the Islamic Golden Age and the Islamic world's turning away from science happened because of al-Ghazali or just coincidentally around the same time:

The Fountain Magazine - Issue - Did al-Ghazali Kill the Science in Islam?

 

[icehorse]

I am not entirely sure if I'd fall into this "crowd". I suppose I support the core ideas of political correctness, even if some of its expressions aren't ideal, as is to be expected. And I guess I support multiculturalism, although there are some values I'd like to see spread.

Are my values truly liberal values? Well, I'd say that in the true sense of the word they are, as in they are more libertarian, but that comes with being an anarchist. I'm certainly not an economic liberal, although one might call me a social liberal.

I guess I'm just saying I'm not sure how water-tight your definitions are.

Fair enough, although I think the distinction is an improvement. I welcome further distinctions with their attendant labels

 

[Kirran]

Fair enough, although I think the distinction is an improvement. I welcome further distinctions with their attendant labels

Between economic and social liberal? I think that's a very important distinction!

But being in the general far-left/post-left area of politics means you're likely to differ with definitions used in the mainstream.

 

[LuisDantas]

Oops I did it again. Sorry, I was sure I picked up that abbreviation here on RF!? PCMC is "politically correct, multi-culturalist".

My contention is that for the most part, the PCMC crowd has abandoned true liberal values which I think traditionally were closely aligned with secular humanism.

I guess I disagree.

 

[icehorse]

Between economic and social liberal? I think that's a very important distinction!

But being in the general far-left/post-left area of politics means you're likely to differ with definitions used in the mainstream.

I think the mainstream definitions are too crude to be useful. Very few of us fit into the mainstream definitions.

For the purpose of this discussion I'm focusing on the social not the economic, although the two are intertwined.

 

[icehorse]

I guess I disagree.

Can you say more, or do you need for me to say more? I would say, for example, that any non-Muslim that labels a person as "Islamophobic" has largely abandoned liberal values.

 

[Kirran]

I think the mainstream definitions are too crude to be useful. Very few of us fit into the mainstream definitions.

For the purpose of this discussion I'm focusing on the social not the economic, although the two are intertwined.

Hmm, in that case you could call me a liberal. I support freedom of religion, speech, thought within a healthy society, I oppose capital punishment, support rehabilitation programs, am in favour of drug legalisation, am in favour of attempting to bring greater equality for women, queer people, those of historically and/or currently disenfranchised ethnicities and other minorities etc.

 

[Kirran]

Can you say more, or do you need for me to say more? I would say, for example, that any non-Muslim that labels a person as "Islamophobic" has largely abandoned liberal values.

I would say that somebody who irrationally labels all Muslims as terrorists, and thinks of Islam as an intrinsically terroristic religion, can be fairly called an Islamophobe.

 

[icehorse]

Hmm, in that case you could call me a liberal. I support freedom of religion, speech, thought within a healthy society, I oppose capital punishment, support rehabilitation programs, am in favour of drug legalisation, am in favour of attempting to bring greater equality for women, queer people, those of historically and/or currently disenfranchised ethnicities and other minorities etc.

Perhaps we could label that "social liberal"? And BTW, me too!
(I also happen to be mostly an economic liberal as well, but that's for a different discussion, I think?)

 

[icehorse]

I would say that somebody who irrationally labels all Muslims as terrorists, and thinks of Islam as an intrinsically terroristic religion, can be fairly called an Islamophobe.

There certainly a few people with those extreme opinions. But in my experience, people with legitimate criticisms of Islam are also often labeled as Islamophobes. So, for example, when Ayaan Hirsi Ali gets banned from speaking at a university, we have misguided PCMC at work.

 

[LuisDantas]

Can you say more, or do you need for me to say more? I would say, for example, that any non-Muslim that labels a person as "Islamophobic" has largely abandoned liberal values.

Two points.

First, I think unqualified liberalism should be assumed social as opposed to economic. I don't think economic liberalism is particularly traditional, nor worthwhile.

Second, political correctness and multiculturalism are hardly opposed to warning against the dangers of unchallenged Islamism, at least by my view of those concepts.

 

[icehorse]

Two points.

First, I think unqualified liberalism should be assumed social as opposed to economic. I don't think economic liberalism is particularly traditional, nor worthwhile.

Second, political correctness and multiculturalism are hardly opposed to warning against the dangers of unchallenged Islamism, at least by my view of those concepts.

Agreed on the economic aspects.

On the PCMC, you'd think that by definition your explanation would be correct, but it's far too often not. We see PCMC politicians across Europe denying real issues in service of PCMC.

 

[LuisDantas]

Agreed on the economic aspects.

On the PCMC, you'd think that by definition your explanation would be correct, but it's far too often not. We see PCMC politicians across Europe denying real issues in service of PCMC.

Is that so? Somehow I would expect a different motivation.

I suspect many politicians and even many in the general public are simply afraid of the consequences of too sudden an awareness, too strong a backlash that can not really be reversed or contained.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

But just to put the religion verses science thing in perspective, remember that just a few hundred years ago it was very risky in Catholic lands to declare that the earth wasn't flat or the center of the universe.

Just for the record, in the Middle Ages every university student (i.e. potential priest, lawyer, or doctor) took a course in basic astronomy, including the evidence for the Earth being a sphere. As for it being the centre of the universe, if the universe is infinite, then it is. (Think about it).

 

[Altfish]

Thru all the history of Islam.

They seemed to give up science about 1000-years ago

 

[icehorse]

Is that so? Somehow I would expect a different motivation.

I suspect many politicians and even many in the general public are simply afraid of the consequences of too sudden an awareness, too strong a backlash that can not really be reversed or contained.

I've had that thought off and on myself. A sort of "the public can't handle the truth" situation?

 

[Smart_Guy]

Guys, I think most of you are missing the main point. The topic is about Islam first thing, not Muslims (confusing the two is a thing people have, I know). The Islamic heritage/history had a respectable contribution to science as a fact, whether it was 4,571 years ago or yesterday. The main point is about the effect of Islam as a religion on it. I believe this makes texts the best source to give a thought about it; e.g. motivation, discouraging, etc. in the texts or maybe interpretations of those texts.

 

[MD]

Science is kind of incompatible with all religion as science works on empiricism while religion works on subjective belief. The Islamic Golden Age had a huge start from the Zoroastrian Sassanians but what the Muslims had was fantastic administration and organization.

This organization allowed for better exchange of information, which allowed for faster dissemination of knowledge and information. By uniting the Middle East under one banner and ideology, unity paved the way for progress. Also by positing strict monotheism a lot of animist beliefs were discarded and naturalist mechanisms of God were sought out.

 

[EliaHarr]

If you want a Muslim's opinion then let me tell you this, yes Islam was a reason behind a lot of Muslims scientific contributions. For example we have to wash our hands, face, arms, feet, head 5 times a day for prayers plus the well known fact that Islam emphasizes on hygiene, so a Muslim scientist mixed some ingredients to make what is know today as Soap.
Also our prayers have to be on a specific time so Muslims tried to make something to mark time using shadow.
Islamic calendar (Hijri) which helps in knowing the beginning and end of Ramadhan, is based on moon phases so that's why Muslim scientists cared about Astronomy.
In Islam inheritance is so complicated, and every person has a specific share to take, so that's why Muslim scientists cared about Mathematics.
And that's just some examples.
Thank you