I read a very thought-provoking article today by Pervez Hoodbhoy, chair and professor in the department of physics at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad, Pakistan, where he has taught for 34 years.
http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_8/49_1.shtml
It was interesting to read and realize that things I accept as commonplace are unusual in many Islamic nations. What I came away with is the general impression that, while Islam is compatible with science, there are numerous factors in current Islamic leadership and society which retard growth. The main points I drew were:
- Suppression of women — particularly requiring the veil — leads to an environment in which fewer people are willing to speak up, with fewer contributions by women and men.
- Science and religion are still at odds in some ideological areas, and when the nation is Islamic, science loses.
- Most Muslim countries are still poor, despite the exception of a few oil-rich states.
- Native languages do not cope well with science.
- Few scientific works are translated into native languages.
- The scientific method is alien in a “society in which absolute authority comes from above, questions are asked only with difficulty, the penalties for disbelief are severe, the intellect is denigrated, and a certainty exists that all answers are already known and must only be discovered.”
- Religious experience is believed to have scientific credence, with the resulting lack of testable hypotheses. “Science finds every soil barren in which miracles are taken literally and seriously and revelation is considered to provide authentic knowledge of the physical world.”
- The West financially and ideologically supported fundamentalist Islam for many years because it suited its colonial and resource needs. A rise in fundamentalism comes at the expense of Enlightenment thinking, and corresponds to a fall in scientific innovation.
All is not lost, however, and Hoodbhoy sees a future in which the Islamic communities which brought us Algebra and astronomy are again full participants in advancing science. He believes, however, that it will require a fairly radical shift in Muslim thinking which “shrugs off the dead hand of tradition, rejects fatalism and absolute belief in authority, accepts the legitimacy of temporal laws, values intellectual rigor and scientific honesty, and respects cultural and personal freedoms.” Most importantly, though, he does not think that real scientific progress can occur while these endless clashes with the West continue.
“On an ever-shrinking globe, there can be no winners in that conflict: It is time to calm the waters. We must learn to drop the pursuit of narrow nationalist and religious agendas, both in the West and among Muslims. In the long run, political boundaries should and can be treated as artificial and temporary, as shown by the successful creation of the European Union. Just as important, the practice of religion must be a matter of choice for the individual, not enforced by the state. This leaves secular humanism, based on common sense and the principles of logic and reason, as our only reasonable choice for governance and progress. Being scientists, we understand this easily. The task is to persuade those who do not.”
Catholicism in the Middle Ages/Renaissance
If I’m not mistaken, didn’t Galileo suffer house arrest for his championing of the Copernican theory of heliocentricity?
But the Monks also saved a lot of Roman and Greek knowledge as well, so it all cancels out. Just like the Muslims gave us zero.
And right now, what is more dangerous to science in America than the Intelligent Design push? (OK, besides the politicization of science and the lack of unbiased, double-blind experiments).
The worst thing about a lot of religion in America today is that it seems to have ambitions to resemble the Islamic religion’s hold on government and society in the Middle East.
My $.02 Weed
“House Arrest”
I don’t have any reliable source to back this, but I recall Galileo’s house arrest included confinement near the church, and that the church was feeding and housing him to continue research on his theories. I also recall his students continued his work without interference from the church; it was one of his students who went on to fully invent the barometer.
Umm.. weed’s gone crazy.
“What is more dangerous to science in America than the Intelligent Design push?”
Umm.. is it really that dangerous (as an ID pusher, I don’t see the problem)
Really, ID could be described as a significant threat to the general acceptance of evolution-based origin of species theory among certain small segments of the population, but to call it the biggest threatto science is beyond hyperbolic.
Bigger threats.. Lack of educational motivation in primary and high schools; gravitation of smart people toward business, law, and practicing medicine (as opposed to theoretical); lack of funding secondary to reappropriation of funds toward a war economy; outsourcing of scientific jobs to india and china; the list goes on..
“The worst thing about a lot of religion in America today is that it seems to have ambitions to resemble the Islamic religion’s hold on government and society in the Middle East”
I think that most major religions have no ambition to control government with the exception of attempting to subvert what they would describe as moral decline.. and despite their efforts, they are too reactionary to have an effect. the fact is, teenage loss of virginity is reaching an all time low age, divorce rates remain high, gambling is more pervasive and accepted, and society now shuns people who would have shunned people who believe differently. The only prejudice allowed is against prejudiced people.
Sorry, but it doesnt hold water for me.
Visit the Official Justin Timpane Website Music, Acting, and More! http://www.timpane.com
The threat of ID
Do you know what the goal of the ID movement is? Here it is, in their own words, from their own publication upon the founding of the Discovery Institute:
“Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for a broadly theistic understanding of nature…Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.”
The cultural legacy of Materialism is the Enlightenment, the fruits of which were democracy, the USA, individual liberties for non-royalty, discovery of the heliocentric model of the solar system, Isaac Newton, religious tolerance, Thomas Jefferson, and more.
The goal of the chief ID proponents is to replace science with research consistent with Christian convictions. You can see how successful Islamic nations have been with substantial scientific contributions under a science agenda consistent with Muslim convictions in Hoodbhoy’s article: there have been no substantial scientific contributions from Islamic areas for nearly seven centuries.
Don’t think that religious orthodoxy is stifling promising research right now in the USA? Check out the embryonic stem cell argument and fiats from the President banning research in this area due to religious concerns. Or the ban on cloning higher-order mammals in the US… chiefly because humans are held for religious reasons to be unique and imbued with a soul, and cloning research on higher-order mammals would threaten that world-view.
I consider the chief proponents of the intelligent design movement, particularly the Discovery Institute and the Institute for Creation Research, the rotten roots of the current disdain for science among American schoolchildren. I lay the blame for the decline in scientific education, including some of the symptoms you mentioned, squarely at the feet of these organizations. As long as children are taught at home that what they are taught in science class is b——t, we’re going to suffer this same apathy toward science that we’re currently experiencing. The ICR and Discovery Institute, while slow to win battles in the courts, are winning dogma battles at home all over the nation with the resulting decline in scientific interest among Americans.
—
Matthew P. Barnson
P.S. I’m not saying the current American scientific apathy is exclusively the fault of the DI and ICR, but their message provided fodder for the conservative revolution in government from 2000-2006, which saw the largest reduction in research grants in history, among other things.
Fix you Water Pail Then
Wow…
Yeah, to call the ID movement the biggest threat to science is beyond hyperbolic, it’s so far past it as to be truth. The scientific method, which calls for repeatable, observable results given identical conditions, has brought us from “casting out demons” and sacrificing animals to organ transplants, genetic testing and manipulation, and forays into the brain which would have been branded magic (or witchcraft) in the not so distant past. How many Christians, when faced with the specter of death, embraced medicine and the science behind it to save their lives? The same scientific method which allowed us to cure polio is also the same method we use for carbon dating. The same science is behind DNA analysis of prehistoric dinosaur finds as is Tylenol and Motrin. I don’t see how you can use one and praise it while saying the other is false and throw it under the bus?
Justin, my beef with ID is that it tries to discredit widely accepted scientific beliefs in order to try to rectify what science has learned with what’s in the Bible. I don’t think you accept the Genesis version of creation as what really happened, so I don’t view you as an ID proponent.
Science is in trouble because the gov’t has cut off grants for theoretical research for the past 20-30 years. So now all the research that is done is done by private companies which have a bias. But from the ground up, the scientific method is being undermined by the campaign to teach children that all natural phenomena arise from God, and are explained in the Bible. To be rude, and to spark a fight, I say that’s that silly. Ludicrous. Asinine. And scary, for the future of the country.
God has no place in science. God belongs in the hearts of those who practice science, but science is based on repeatable, observable facts.
The religious right doesn’t try to control government? It’s not trying to put ID in schools and shun evolution? It’s not keeping us from fetal cell research and genetic testing? It’s not throwing gays under the bus for trying to get equal rights as married people?
I don’t know if the rates at which loss of virginty are dropping or rising, but pregnancy rates have dropped for the past 10 years. Divorce rates are overstated and dropping as well. I see nothing wrong with gambling (or drinking or dancing or sex) as long as it’s done with moderation. However, problem gambling has increased, so I give you that one.
And this one:
Huh? This is a bad thing? Prejudice is something we should promote? Please explain…
Justin, you have open views about other beliefs. I don’t think you have a problem with teaching evolution as a theory. But the ID people, they want to stop teaching evolution to children. Not because the theory is flawed, but because it threatens their teaching of the Bible!!!. They use lies and propaganda to discredit something which has made our life better. Not the teaching of evolution directly, but the science behind it. What amazing things could we do with genetic medicine? Sadly, we’ll have to find out from other countries as we fall behind due to GW’s religious stance on the topic.
My $.02 Weed
90 lb weakling..
A couple responses..
My issue is not that ID proponents, especially the fanatic ones, are not attempting to circumvent the teaching of evolutionary teaching.. it is that they simply lack the ability. I see no real credible evidence that they are hurting science in the overwhelming way you describe (as much as some might WANT to).
Now, in terms of money and research for science, it is the capitalistic nature of our society that has led to privately funded science firms, not some ID conspiracy to keep government money away. The fact is, we think too short term.. and th emoney always seems to go to short term fixes, not long term goals.
As for genetic research, don’t confuse ID with people who want stem cell research on embryos stopped. The idea behind that is that those embryos have souls from the moment of conception, and frankly, there are plenty of ID people who disagree.. just as there are plenty of people who do not believe in the literal translation of Genesis who might be uncomfortable with the notion.
Here is where you are off base. You claim that there is an overwhelming number of children.. enough to constitute the greates existing threat to science in america.. whose understanding of science is “undermined by the campaign to teach children that all natural phenomena arise from God, and are explained in the Bible”. You seem to think that this army of children who reject evolution is going to represent an intense threat.
I reject this. The kid (if there is one, never more than three) who sits up and says “what about ‘creation'” in science class is made fun of, not embraced. Most Christians I know embrace science wholeheartedly. I have known a lot of really smart people, and a lot of believers, and the vast majority of them have no intention of seeing science taught any differently.
Furthermore, I reject the idea that the ID threat in the classroom is legitimate at all. Most of the time I hear that they want lip service, a mention of an “alternate theory” – yes, perhaps some want more.. but honestly, they lack the power to get more than the lip service in any kind of number, and they lack the power to get even that in most cases. I challenge you to show me a ratio of schools whose science classes reject evolution vs. those who teach it without mention of creationism. I’d warrant that there were not more than 2 of one for every hundred of the other.
Weed, the issue is not that ID wants more power.. it is that it lacks the resources to really gain any, especially where schooling of children is concerned. Really, its a silly, uphill battle they are trying to fight in that regard.
As for their beliefs, and what children may be taught in the home, I’d wager that the prevailing theory regarding Genesis by self-described christians is that it is an Allegorical story, like a parable. I would wager that the number of people who would call themselves “Christians” who would believe in the literal translation of Genesis to be outnumbered by at least 3 to 1.
Even then, most Literalists find room in their belief structure for some scientific evidence, and many of them have no real stake in what is being taught in schools.
So.. to recap: “The religious right doesn’t try to control government?” It tries, and in some cases succeeds, but when it comes to ID, it has failed in its goals. In fact, with the exception of stem cells and gay marriage, it has failed miserbly. Even there, it has lost some of its grip and will continue to..
(I want to comment parenthetically on Stem Cells. It is understandable {even though I disagree, I think} that if you held the belief that something had a soul, you would attempt to circumvent its destruction. I think it is a stretch to think that these cells have a soul.. but I understand the argument.. and it is not a deliberate subversion of science.. it is considered protection. As I disagree with the idea that there are souls there, I disagree with blocking the research.. and I think others are coming around)
My point on the virginity and sex and drinking and gambling is that these are other inroads that the “Religious Right” are trying to make into society and failing. As for the prejudice issue.. the point is that the religious right is blamed for hostility toward gays and atheists and scientists and pro-choicers – and it is a small, loud faction that does these things.. and they are shunned by the overwhelming majority of believers.
As for what i believe. I believe in intelligent design. I belive that all natural law comes from God. I believe that the scientific method is an appropriate way to discover natural law, and I believe that there is no divide between what the Bible says and 99% of what science has to say. As for the other 1%, I am open to deliberation. I don’t consider my beliefs to be asinine because I do not belive belief in God and Science has to be mutually exclusive. I believe God is as REAL as you or me, and I believe the discoveries of science are too.
As to the history of ID vs. Science.. you have proved my point. The power of religion over science is WANING, and its threat has diminished. The fact is, it would rather be the biggest threat.. but it barely makes top 5 in my book. The fact is, most really brilliant kids want to have money and stuff and to be cool.. and it is the pursuit of wealth that is keeping most of our really brilliant kids from becoming research scientists. The highest IQs are (non-genetic) engineers, lawyers, (non-research) Doctors, and overwhelmingly businessmen. The best educated are from families with money, and so the quest for money is in their upbrining far more than a rejection of science.
So.. again.. radical ID proponents would love for you to be right. But they are th 90lb weakling compared to other threats.
Visit the Official Justin Timpane Website Music, Acting, and More! http://www.timpane.com
Concerning ID as a threat to
Concerning ID as a threat to science in America, I’ll absolutely agree that the desire by the Religious Right to undermine empirical science is there. But in order for something to be a threat, the ability must be there as well as the desire. So far the stories I’ve seen in the press regarding ID in schools is that either the school board or the court system ends up shooting it down, systematically.
True, there is work being done to block stem cell research and the like, but that doesn’t really have anything to do with ID-theory. It has to do with Religion, absolutely, but not specifically ID.
Now, if you were to say that ID is merely one tactic (albeit largely an ineffective one) that the Religious Right is using to try to bring about a theocracy, I’d go with you on that.
Personally, I think science teachers are missing out on a wonderfully perverse opportunity. If I were forced to teach ID in schools, then I would delight in teaching my kids about the Hindu creation story, or how the Kami created the world and divided it in equal parts between them, or really any creation story that had *nothing* to do with Genesis. Because technically, they’re all just as valid.