Islam and science Flashcards
1
Q
What does Sura 3:189 say? in the…
A
“In the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of night and day, are surely signs to men of understanding”
2
Q
What does sura 20:114 say? O lord…
A
- ” O Lord! Increase me in knowledge.” (20: 114)
3
Q
What does sura 7:190 say? when they …
A
“When they reflect on the grandeur of nature, they are deeply moved and exclaim: “Our Lord! (Rabb) Thou hast not created this in vain”
4
Q
What does sura 41:53 say? soon we…
A
- Soon we will show them our signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls until it manifests truth on them.
5
Q
What does sura 10:101 say? behold all…
A
“Behold all that is In the heavens and on earth”
6
Q
What does sura 88:17 say? do they….
A
“Do they not look At the Camels, How they are made”
7
Q
What does sura 29:20 say? travel through…
A
“Travel through the earth And see how God did Originate creation; so will God produce a later creation: For God has Power over all Things”
8
Q
What did Hayyan do?
A
- Father of Chemistry
- systemised process of distillations
- paved the way for classification of substances into metals, non metals et
- pioneer of applied chemistry
9
Q
What did Ibn Sina do?
A
- Wrote the Canon of medicine (“The single most famous book in the history of medicine, in east or west. - Encyclopedia Britannica”)
- It laid out rules for testing effectiveness of drugs
- was used up until early 19th century
10
Q
What did Ibn Al Nafi do?
A
- discovered blood circulatory system
- first to correctly describe constitution of lungs
11
Q
What did Razi do?
A
- Pioneer of neurosurgery
- First to use opium for anaesthesia
- work on smallpox was recognised in 1970
12
Q
What did Al Haitham do?
A
- first to accurately describe function and structure of eye
- discovered laws of refraction
13
Q
What did Al Khawarizmi do?
A
- Founder of algebra
14
Q
What did Al Tusi do?
A
- Contributed to trigonometry
- Produced a popular astronomy table
14
Q
What did Al Biruni do?
A
- Determined density of 18 different stones
- figured out that the earth rotates on its own axis, and determined earth’s circumference 700 years prior to Newton
15
Q
What did Al Battani do?
A
- accurately determined solar year length
- determined lengths of seasons and the true orbit of the sun
16
Q
What did Ibn Firnas do?
A
- first to make glass from stone
- designed a water clock
- first to make a scientific attempt at flight
17
Q
How does science contradict the Quran?
A
Science suggests the creation of the universe can happen randomly by chance with no divine intervention and this is contrary to the Qura’n which shows divine intervention “Indeed these are signs for men of understanding”
Evolution contradicts the Qur’an as humans did not come from apes in the Qur’an and the first man was made from clay.
Qur’an does talk about angels which seems at odds with science.
18
Q
Why did science in Islam go into decline?
A
- Printing presses couldn’t print Arabic
- Colonisation - West showing superiority
- Islamic empire declined after attacked by Mongols - rivers ran black with ink of destroyed books
- Spanish army forced Muslims to surrender - burnt all Arabic texts from Granada library
19
Q
What did Ghazali’s incoherence of the philosophers do?
A
It attacked philosophy on 20 counts of heresy. These included the idea that nature had its own, internally-consistent laws and ways of operating – this was heretical because only God is truly independent, and nature must be dependent on God
20
Q
Why did the Asharis deny causality?
A
They were trying to justify miracles, such as that of Abraham remaining unharmed when thrown into a large fire. Fire burned objects, they reasoned, not because of an innate burning quality but because God created this quality in fire at every instant. If God willed, he could suspend the burning action of fire, as he did to save Abraham. Ghazali extended this reasoning to other familiar situations: “Water does not quench thirst, bread does not satisfy hunger and medicine does not cure illness” – it is always God who mediates what we think is cause and effect.
21
Q
What did Ibn Rushd (Averroes) write in response to Ghazali?
A
The Incoherence of the Incoherence. In it, he described al-Ghazali’s above-mentioned arguments as “sophistry … very objectionable, and contrary to common sense.” He believed in harmony of religon and philosphy. Averroes argued that God creates things with innate qualities so that water, bread and medicine do have effects via their intrinsic nature.
22
Q
Who’s ideas did the Islamic world favour - Ghazali or Rushd?
A
They largely ignored Averroes in favour of al-Ghazali, whilst Averroes had a profound influence upon the Christian west. Al-Ghazali’s triumph in the Islamic world led to a deepening gulf between religion and science. A couple of examples from 15th-century traditionalist scholars will illustrate this. Ibn Hajar, a master of hadith-commentary, queried the Muslim astronomers who explained that solar eclipses were caused by the moon blocking the sun: “How can this be, when you yourselves claim that the sun is much bigger than the moon?” And the Egyptian scholar Suyuti wrote in his Qur’an-commentary, “The religious authorities hold that the earth is flat, in opposition to the astronomers who hold that it is spherical, although this is not a major principle of religion.”
23
Q
What was Ghazali’s background?
A
In adolescence, Al-Ghazali questioned authority and inherited beliefs. Muhammad said “Everyone who is born is born with a sound nature, it is his parents who make him a Jew…..” Ghazali wanted to find his original nature. In order to do this he had to question the authority from where his beliefs had come from. He aimed to search for true knowledge. By true knowledge, he meant that which cannot be doubted.
24
What was Ghazali's first spiritual crisis?
Al-Ghazali reasoned that knowledge through the senses can be doubted e.g. the sun looks small and yet it is bigger than the earth! He then says to consider dreaming. When you wake up, you know that it was false. How do you know that your waking beliefs are true? You might “wake up” from these, just as you do when you have been dreaming. Life in this world could be a dream and the afterlife could be real. Muhammad said “The people are dreaming, when they die, they become awake”. All this led to doubting the intellect too.
At this point, Al-Ghazali entered a crisis! He had to doubt the senses and doubt the intellect.
25
What did Ghazali decide after crisis 1?
He believed that at this point, God intervened and allowed him to accept necessary truths from the intellect. Muhammad said “God created his creatures in darkness and then sprinkled upon them some of his light”. The first principles (necessary truths) are not sought, they are from God i.e. the Qur’an.
26
What did Ghazali study to find truth?
Theology, the Batiniyah, Philosophy and the Sufis. He believed that truth must be found in one of these classes
27
Ghazali's issues with the philosophers - maths
This study is very precise and so the students of Maths believe that this must be the case with the philosopher because Maths has come from the Philosophers. As the Philosophers deny God’s attributes and revealed truths, so does the student of Maths “If religion were true, it would not have escaped the notice of these men since they are so precise in Science”.
However, Ghazali points out that just because you are good at Maths, that does not mean that you excel in other fields.
Ghazali says that the second drawback is that others hear the Mathematicians speak and they want to remain true to Islam. This then leads to them rejecting every Science e.g. they reject planetary motion. When others hear that they are rejecting Science, they then believe that Islam is based on ignorance and so go off it! Yet the Qur’an supports Scientfic truths, so they should not do this.
28
Ghazali's issues with the philosophers - logic
Those who follow logic try to apply the same conditions of logic to belief in God. However, this can’t be done. Consequently, they have to relax their standard of proof and this leads to unbelief.
29
Ghazali's issues with the philosophers - natural science/physics
Those who study these have to realise that all of this comes from God. Planets cannot proceed by their own essence. They must be caused and moved by God.
30
Ghazali's issues with the philosophers - theology/metaphysics
They deny physical resurrections, only affirming spiritual resurrection; they deny God knowing particulars, only universals; they deny the beginning of the world, as they say it is eternal; they deny the attributes of God. All this goes against the Qur'an.
31
Ghazali's issues with the philosophers - politics
Discussions of this are to do with governmental advantage and come from the prophets of old.
32
Ghazali's issues with the philosophers - ethics
The opponents of the philosophers hear what they are saying and then disregard it all because they believe that philosophers are liars. Ghazali says that this is wrong because even though the Philosophers may have a lot wrong, it does not mean that all of what they preach is wrong. Ghazali says that the intelligent man must consider what he believes to be true and then decide on the truth of what the philosophers are saying from this, not decide that whatever they say is false because it has come from them.
Those who support the philosophers are likely to accept everything that they say, even though the truth is mixed with falsehood. Ghazali thinks that they must be kept from the teachings of the Philosophers because they will mix the truth of the Qur’an with their own falsehoods. Only the educated can decipher what is false and what is truth
33
What is Ghazali's example of the money changer?
He gives the example of a money changer looking through a counterfeiter’s purse. There is no problem for the money changer because he can see what is true gold and what is not. The problem is, that when it comes to Ethics, the common man is not skilled like the money changer and can not work out truth from untruth.
34
How does Ghazali say one can know whether a philosopher's ethical statement is true?
One must decide if it is reasonable, if there is proof to support it and if it does not contradict the Qur’an and the Sunnah. If it passes these tests, it should be considered true.
35
What is Ghazali's analogy of the snake charmer?
He gives the analogy of a snake charmer ensuring that a small boy does not watch him touch the snake as the small boy will think he can do the same, when he can’t. The snake charmer must show caution in front of the boy just as the first rate scholar will act in front of a student.
36
What was Ghazali's second crisis?
In search of truth, Ghazali began reading sufi books. He soon realised it had to be experienced rather than understood. Ghazali gives the analogy of knowing what it is to be healthy and then actually being healthy. Through his own experiences, Ghazali already believed in God, the Prophets and the Last Day. He realised though that to be saved he needed to free himself from all worldly desire, turning from wealth and position. He realised his lectures were unimportant, and that his motive was public recognition and influence. He claims that he was heading for hell fire! This set him into crisis. , Ghazali claims that God made his tongue dry up so that he could no longer lecture. He went off his food and drink and could not digest. The Doctors gave up on him realising that this was a consequence of anxiety. He had to turn to God.
37
How was Ghazali saved through sufism?
Ghazali told people he was going to Mecca. However, he went to Syria, leaving money for his children and taking enough with him to sustain himself. Ghazali went to Damascus and spent time practising as a Sufi, purifying his heart and staying at the mosque in Damascus. He spent two years there. He then went to Jerusalem and then to Mecca. When he went home, he still continued to practise as a Sufi but rarely achieved ecstasy as he started to be taken up with worldly concerns again. He continued like this for ten years. Ghazali claims that he learnt a lot during this time. He learnt that the life of the mystic is the one most likely to lead to the truth. One needs to purify the heart and allow it to be absorbed by God (fana). In the first stage, mystics will have visions of angels and the prophets and then they will speak to them and be instructed by them. After this, they will achieve union with God or a connection with God. Those that live this path will experience this first hand (immediate experience) and this gives knowledge. Others will experience it by being in the presence of the mystic and listening to them. This requires faith (iman).
38
What quote did Ghazali say the life of the mystic brings?
“illuminations from the light of the prophetic lamp”
39
What was Rushd's background?
Ibn Rushd was born fifteen years after Al-Ghazali. He was a legalist and was heavily influenced by Aristotle and his idea of the Prime Mover. Rushd believed that the Qur’an should be interpreted in the light of philosophy (God being timeless) and drew up rules to guide the groups in their interpretation of the Qur’an. However, he ended up having to flee for his life!
40
How did Rushd respond to Ghazali in the Incoherence of the Incoherence? Why did he suggest we must study philosophy?
- The Qur'an commands it
- The best way to study creation is through philosophy because philosophy uses demonstration. Philosophy teaches the intellectual which reasoning is valid and which is invalid. They must build on the work of previous philosophers and study it critically.
- The Qur’an has commanded humans to study the ancients, so If the believer studies philosophy properly and critically, they will not be harmed by their studies.
- Any harm that comes from it is accidental.
- Not all people can find truth through philosophy (demonstration). Here, he agrees with Ghazali as philosophy can lead the uneducated astray. There are other ways of finding the truth-dialectical (discussion) and rhetorical (preaching).
41
Why did Rushd believe any harm from philosophy is accidental?
Rushd gives the example of choking on water. This is a side effect of drinking water when thirsty and is accidental. The water and the thirst are not accidental. If there is any serious harm from studying philosophy, Rushd says that this must be due to the student being over passionate, having a bad teacher or suffering some natural deficiency. Rushd gives the example of Muhammad being asked how someone’s brother can be helped with diarrhoea. Muhammad advised drinking honey. When the diarrhoea worsened, Muhammad said “Allah has said the truth, but you brother’s abdomen has told a lie”.
42
Views on the universe
Rushd - The universe is eternal. Allah sustains the universe which is already in existence much like the prime mover (from Aristotle).
Ghazali - The universe is not eternal. This is upheld in the Qur’an which states the universe came about from nothing. Allah brought the universe into existence and could destroy it if he chose
43
Views on Allah's attributes
Rushd - Allah is timeless, spaceless and wholly simple (like Aquinas). He cannot act in time. Allah cannot act to create and cannot “just decide”. To say Allah can act is too anthropomorphic. The Qur’an must be read allegorically.
Ghazali - Allah is in time much like a human agent. Divine action is like human action. Allah can will to do things and then act. This is how the Qur’an portrays Allah.
44
Views on human action
Rushd - Not every human act is due to the will of Allah and to say that anything that happens is due to Allah’s will is to deny science, philosophy and Theology. Philosophy points to Allah sustaining (setting up laws) rather than causing acts. If everything happened due to the will of Allah, there would be no rational pattern in creation but there is.
Ghazali - Allah is an agent-he lives, wills and knows. Allah is personal and not impersonal like the God of the philosophers (prime mover). All human acts are only possible because of the will of Allah. It is possible for a decapitated human still to act through the will of Allah.
45
Views on the Qur'an and philosophy
Rushd - Where the Qur’an appears to conflict with philosophy, it should be read allegorically to find the hidden meaning. The Muslim community has long agreed that the Qur’an can have an apparent and a hidden meaning!
Ghazali - Philosophy must not be used to undermine a literal reading of the Qur’anic text. Where there are uncertainties within the texts, mysticism and not philosophy should be used to resolve these issues. Some of the philosophers interpretations were so far from what was written, they had very little to do with the truth.
46
Views on harm from philosophy
Rushd - Philosophy should be studied and was not harmful. Rushd says that any harm is accidental but you must not stop someone “drinking water because they might choke on it” as water is good for you. Thus, philosophy is good for you, if you are well educated and helps you to understand God.
Ghazali - Ghazali concluded that too much harm came from studying Philosophy. A better way to necessary truths was through experience i.e. Sufism.
47
Views on the masses
Rushd - Whilst he agreed with Ghazali that the masses could not learn through philosophy (demonstration), he thought that the masses should be taught by the intellectuals and should learn only through preaching (rhetoric). They should not be informed of allegorical meanings in the Qur’an.
Ghazali - Al-Ghazali would agree that the masses should not be confused. Al-Ghazali says that too much harm comes from studying philosophy. People get led astray and can not decipher truth from untruth in rhetoric. But he would argue that the way to the truth is through experience and not philosophy.
48
Views on heaven/hell/resurrection
Rushd - Heaven and hell are allegories. They are not real. There is no bodily resurrection, there is soul immortality. Like Plato, he says it is the soul which can understand universal truths and can transcend death. For that matter, only those with knowledge of logic and philosophy can discover the truths and so only they will be saved.
Ghazali - The Qur’an has revealed bodily resurrection and heaven and hell. To deny these is to deny the Qur’an which simply cannot be done!
49
Views on Sharia and truth
Rushd - the Qur'an and Shariah law cannot be understood without using philosophy. Only those trained in philosophy will be able to arrive at an accurate understanding and they need to teach those who do not have this understanding. He was, therefore, an elitist and believed that a superficial understanding of both the Qur'an and Sharia law would be misleading and false.
Ghazali - There was truth in philosophy but only those who are well educated and can decipher the truth should read it and use it. The theologians should keep to discussions (dialectic) and the masses should be taught by others through preaching (rhetoric). First principles come from experience (the Sufi path), not philosophy.
50
Views on interpretation
Rushd - As he believed none of the sects had it right (Asharites, mutazalites etc) Ibn Rushd to draw up some fundamental rules to guide sound interpretation:
1) None of the sects have the authority to impose their views on others. Only the philosophers or those who are learned can interpret correctly.
2) Scripture addresses three classes of people – the learned, the theologians and the common people but it does so in different ways
3) Interpretation needs to be correctly applied and Averroes argued that false application gave rise to heretical sects in Islam of which it was held that only one group would be saved.
Ghazali - There should be a very limited interpretation of the Qur’an. Sufism was the way to salvation and knowing God, not Philosophy.
51
What did Vardy say on the Rushd-Ghazali conflict?
The tension between Ibn Rushd and Al-Ghazali has come down to the present day in a continuing tension between philosophy and a literal reading of the Qur'an. Archbishop Rowan Williams, in raising issues about Shariah Law in Britain, also pointed to the need to interpret Shariah Law.
Al-Ghazali would argue for a limited role for rational interpretation and for the importance of mysticism– Allah’s will is sovereign and should be accepted as written.
Ibn Rushd would argue for a central role for reason and for the need to interpret the Qur'an in the light of philosophy. You could use Rushd in an answer about the Attributes of God (you covered this in year 12 where the Qur'an talks of the Hand of God, sitting on a throne.
