5 ms·

Islam was not originally anti-science, as evidenced by the fact that the whole body of basic sciences builds upon Muslim scientific tradition (certainly true of

Islam was not originally anti-science, as evidenced by the fact that the whole body of basic sciences builds upon Muslim scientific tradition (certainly true of medicine, chemistry, optics and astrology, most of basic math etc.). It is not that the Muslims invented these disciplines, but they preserved and expanded upon works from earlier nations such as those of Hellenistic Greece, which would be unknown today if they had not been preserved by the Muslims and later translated to European languages. There was not the same schism between religion and science as there was in the West. In fact most of the eminent Muslim scholars were as prolific in theology as in temporal studies. Consider f.ex. Avicenna, father of modern medicine, who was also a big theologist and had memorized the entire Quran. There are many such examples, f.ex. try reading about Averroes who basically revolutionized European philosophical thought and at the same time was one of the world's leading experts on Islamic law.

astine 18y ago
You need to distinguish between Islam and the society that grew up with it. Averroes may have been an Islamic scholar, but his true god was Aristotle. He was quite explicit in his belief that Aristotle's was the hight of human knowledge and that religion (meaning Islam) was a sort dumbing down meant purely for the masses. Averroes was a pretty crappy Muslim by today's standards. Avicenna had a similar viewpoint, though he was more orthodox. That said, we do owe a lot to these thinkers.
- johnyzee 18y ago
  > Averroes was a pretty crappy Muslim by today's standards. Today's standards are the problem. The above mentioned scientists did consider themselves religious Muslims (Averroes reconciliated Aristotle with Islamic thought in the face of attacks from traditionalists, and more generally was a very very accomplished religious scholar). They just didn't accept the narrowness of the clerical representation. The eminence of these scholars were not flukes but a result of a successful effort by many caliphs to promote science and learning across the empire (f.ex. Harun al-Rashid who is widely recognized for this). As for admiring Hellenistic thought that is universal to earlier Muslim scholars. That is what allowed them to be great, the ability to assimilate foreign ideas.
  - astine 18y ago
    Sure, but today's standards have been THE standard since at least the siege of Jerusalem and were widely held before that. Whether or not these standards are the correct standards would require a much deeper understanding of Islam than I currently have, but the fact that this understanding has always had a strong presence and the fact that it has dominated since the 12th century does explain what happened.
    - johnyzee 18y ago
      Later caliphs f.ex. among the Ottomans were quite progressive particularly politically. But you are right. I just note that there have been different standards, and for a time the prevalent standard was not opposed to science, learning and culture.

astine 18y ago

You need to distinguish between Islam and the society that grew up with it. Averroes may have been an Islamic scholar, but his true god was Aristotle. He was quite explicit in his belief that Aristotle's was the hight of human knowledge and that religion (meaning Islam) was a sort dumbing down meant purely for the masses. Averroes was a pretty crappy Muslim by today's standards. Avicenna had a similar viewpoint, though he was more orthodox. That said, we do owe a lot to these thinkers.

johnyzee 18y ago
> Averroes was a pretty crappy Muslim by today's standards. Today's standards are the problem. The above mentioned scientists did consider themselves religious Muslims (Averroes reconciliated Aristotle with Islamic thought in the face of attacks from traditionalists, and more generally was a very very accomplished religious scholar). They just didn't accept the narrowness of the clerical representation. The eminence of these scholars were not flukes but a result of a successful effort by many caliphs to promote science and learning across the empire (f.ex. Harun al-Rashid who is widely recognized for this). As for admiring Hellenistic thought that is universal to earlier Muslim scholars. That is what allowed them to be great, the ability to assimilate foreign ideas.
- astine 18y ago
  Sure, but today's standards have been THE standard since at least the siege of Jerusalem and were widely held before that. Whether or not these standards are the correct standards would require a much deeper understanding of Islam than I currently have, but the fact that this understanding has always had a strong presence and the fact that it has dominated since the 12th century does explain what happened.
  - johnyzee 18y ago
    Later caliphs f.ex. among the Ottomans were quite progressive particularly politically. But you are right. I just note that there have been different standards, and for a time the prevalent standard was not opposed to science, learning and culture.