Science in Islam

A clear dichotomy exists between science, which relies on methodological observations and trial and error, and religion, which is grounded in faith-based beliefs. The discussions between these two realms have sparked both compromise and conflict, and it seems unlikely that a complete reconciliation will ever be achieved. However, within these dialogues lie opportunities for shared experiences that can bridge gaps, allowing both science and religion to work together to enhance and deepen the human experience. While conflicts of interest and power struggles are inevitable, as Najm al-Din Yousefi points out, scientists and their projects have historically contributed to Islamic law, just as religious issues have spurred scientific research that benefits society. Although the relationship between science and Islam has been complex, periods of antagonism have often been balanced by collaboration. Yet, as Jamil Regap argues, it is a misconception to believe that there is a singular Islamic response to the myriad challenges posed by science; responses have varied across different historical contexts and social priorities.

8th to 10th Century

The translation movement is crucial for understanding the flow of information and knowledge from the West, particularly the Greek and Hellenized legacy of rational discourse, to the Arab states' insatiable thirst for knowledge. Despite ongoing historiographical debates regarding the methods of transmission, the extent of knowledge permeating general society, and the subsequent Latin translations in the 12th century, it is undeniable that there was a concerted effort among political leaders, private patrons, and scientists to facilitate the transfer of information from the West to the Arab world between the 8th and 12th centuries. The second Abbasid Caliph, Al-Mansur, is often credited with championing the translation movement and relocating key documents to Baghdad. He emphasized technical skills and practical knowledge in fields such as architecture, administration, and medicine, all of which significantly influenced daily life during his reign. This focus on practicality is evident in Ibn Qutaiba’s description of the qualifications required for secretaries (Kuttab), who were essential to Islamic governance. Their training mandated a solid understanding of irrigation, agriculture, the movements of the sun, the phases of the moon, and the construction of civil structures like bridges and buildings. Any knowledge that could benefit the Caliphate was sought after and translated into Arabic, laying the groundwork for individual intellectual pursuits. Polymaths such as al-Kindi and al-Farabi stand out for their ability to integrate the practical aspects of medicine, mathematics, astronomy, and pharmacy within the broader Islamic social framework. Al-Farabi, often referred to as the Islamic Aristotle, played a crucial role in not only acquiring knowledge from the West but also in assimilating, disseminating, and critiquing Western thought. His philosophical mastery reflects a deep understanding of Western ideas within the Arab world. As more subjects and concepts were translated into Arabic, new discussions emerged that had not traditionally been part of Arab discourse. Initially, Arab Muslims embraced the pursuit of science as a noble endeavor, often associated with ethnic minorities. They even adapted aspects of the “Zoroastrian Imperial Ideology.” However, challenges arose in applying scientific and philosophical discoveries, as many of these ideas were not clearly defined within Islamic ideology. Scholars like al-Kharizmi and al-Farabi worked to organize the influx of new terminology and concepts, creating comprehensive resources that would benefit Islamic secretaries. Al-Kharizmi distinguished between traditional sciences, which had already been influenced by Islam, and “foreign sciences,” particularly philosophy, astronomy, astrology, and mathematics. This distinction led to later controversies, as observational theories and proofs based on these subjects directly challenged Islamic doctrines. His definition of philosophy as “the science of the true nature of things and of acting according to what is best” posed a direct challenge to Islam, allowing scholars to explore ideas that could contradict Islamic teachings. The translation period was marked by uncertainty and a reevaluation of humanity’s relationship with the environment. As discourse flourished and more individuals sought to understand and rationalize science, the most significant critique emerged at the end of this period from al-Ghazali. In his work, “The Revival of the Religious Sciences,” Ghazali categorizes all aspects of life as living according to God’s will, deeming any knowledge that does not directly support this principle as irrelevant to humanity. He posits that God has already bestowed all necessary knowledge upon the world, and it is humanity’s duty to uncover it without extrapolating beyond what is evident. While he acknowledges a limited role for mathematics and reasoned argument, he insists that science must operate within religious guidelines to determine its relevance to the ultimate goal of perfecting the human soul. Although Ghazali contributed to the critique of science and championed Islam, his arguments often stifled rational debate and restricted scientific discourse, a trend that persisted through the decline of science within the Islamic world. By the 11th century, the translation movement had laid a foundation of knowledge, igniting ongoing debates between science and Islam. Astronomy serves as a prime example of the difficulties in integrating “foreign” scientific principles within Arab culture and Islamic thought. Ragep explores the relationship between astronomy and Islam, identifying two ways in which religion intertwined with this otherwise secular science. Islam sought to lend religious “credibility” to astronomy while simultaneously stripping it of extraneous reasoning to prevent any challenges to Islamic doctrine. Notable mathematicians and philosophers, such as Ibn Sina, endeavored to distinguish astronomy from pseudo-sciences like astrology, aiming to mitigate the metaphysical implications that could arise from the associated philosophies. Ghazali’s arguments, which suggested that undeniable observations could lead to egoism and a failure to live according to God’s plan, still resonate today. As Islamic leaders sought to extract the relevant aspects of astronomy that aligned with religious law, an “instrumentalist” approach emerged. This allowed astronomers to utilize any mathematical or physical constructs they deemed fit, provided their conclusions did not advocate any theories. In essence, astronomers could pursue their craft freely, but they were barred from speculating on the implications of their findings, leaving that responsibility to Islamic clerics. While this might seem like a reasonable compromise, astronomers largely rejected the “instrumentalist” approach, as it fundamentally undermined their objectives. After dedicating countless years to grappling with complex problems and investing a lifetime of hard work, the idea of relinquishing their results to Islamic leadership was disheartening. Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, a Persian polymath who championed Greek philosophy and incorporated it into his Islamic writings, argued passionately for the inclusion of Western philosophy in Islamic society. Al-Sharif al-Jurjani criticized Ghazali supporter Abud al-Din al-Iji, who claimed that the entire concept of calculating the movement of stars was merely an imaginary construct, and he also rejected the instrumentalist approach proposed by Islamic authorities. Although astronomers as a whole dismissed this proposed solution, the ensuing debate with religious authorities ironically compelled them to concentrate on fundamental mathematical and physical principles. This focus ultimately enhanced their understanding and allowed them to build upon the Hellenistic scientific model. Scholars like Ali al-Qushji discovered that sidestepping controversy facilitated the development of their hypotheses, and the separation of astronomy from philosophy liberated the discipline from external interference. In other words, while the positions of astronomy and Islam were never reconciled, astronomers were driven to discard anything that could not be substantiated through mathematics and observation, ultimately freeing them from ambiguous pseudo-science and outside meddling.

19th - 20th Century

The dialogue between science and Islam has persisted vigorously, remaining just as relevant today. The groundbreaking technologies that have emerged over the past century have sparked numerous ethical questions. For example, while nuclear technology has significantly advanced energy production, it has also been harnessed as a devastating weapon. As science grows increasingly complex and relies on unbiased observation, religious orthodoxy strives to maintain its influence over the impact of science on humanity. One notable observer of this dynamic is Mehdi Golshani, who contends that science is responsible for the horrific destruction that has afflicted mankind, arguing that it has lost the ethical grounding necessary to prevent such degradation of the environment and society. However, he conflates science with its implementation phase and overlooks the myriad ethical discussions and debates currently taking place within the scientific community. While Golshani advocates for a religious-based ethical education system within science—presumably favoring Islam given his background in Islamic theology—there is a naiveté in assuming that a single, institutionalized ethical framework could more effectively address today’s moral dilemmas than the collaborative efforts of millions of scientists learning from one another's diverse perspectives. In his study of science in post-revolutionary Iran, Farhad Khosrokhavar examines the impact of institutionalized religion on the scientific landscape and its broader implications. The Islamic Revolution has maintained a complicated relationship with science, benefiting from scientific advancements while simultaneously critiquing the perceived "uselessness" of many theoretical and abstract concepts. A standard measure of scientific achievement reveals that Iranian articles published in scientific journals plummeted immediately after the revolution, reaching a low of 120. However, they have since rebounded to a respectable level comparable to larger countries with significant scientific resources. Yet, this relationship has been fraught with danger and controversy, as many scientists faced purges from their positions, accused of being un-Islamic or anti-revolutionary. Practitioners of science in Iran have had to tread carefully, wary of crossing the line between empirical observation and challenging Islamic doctrine, echoing the warnings of al-Ghalazi. While Khosrokhavar expresses optimism about the future of Iranian science—his role with Iran’s Ministry of Science and Technology necessitating a degree of skepticism—other scholars, such as Pervez Hoodbhoy, lament the detrimental influence of politicized Islam on science in Pakistan, highlighting how institutionalized mechanisms of control can stifle the scientific method.

Conclusion

The relationship between science and Islam has always been tenuous, and it is unlikely that a definitive compromise accommodating both perspectives will ever be reached. However, as demonstrated by the translation movement and the advancements in astronomy during the 13th to 15th centuries, engaging in debate often compels both sides to reassess their core priorities. This return to fundamental principles can enhance their respective disciplines. When the balance tips toward religio-political dominance, science suffers, as it becomes more concerned with avoiding offense to religious beliefs than with pursuing unbiased observation of natural phenomena. While there is no uniform Islamic response to science, the risk of homogenized religious thinking poses a challenge by stifling the diversity of opinions and philosophies that foster innovation and discovery.