Why Does the Muslim World Lag in Science?

[gambit]

American moon landing is an example of dictatorial directions? Who was the dictator ruling the USA in 1960s? If your philosophy is correct, than the international scientific journals should have been stuffed with the research being conducted by the Scientists from the countries ruled by the dictatorial regimes; Arab countries? African countries? Latin American countries? and finally from our beloved Pakistan? In contrast to that, we see almost 99% of scientific contribution was made by the USA and Europe (Germany is an exception) in the past 200 years. Even Russia can not be given as an example of Dictatorship as they had a Politbureau and same is also true for China.

If you want to give an example of Dictatorship, give the example of Germany. But again, all their inventions and innovations were more directed towards the destruction rather than for the betterment of the human beings. Very little biomedical research was conducted by the Germans, and the little that was done comes more under the crimes against the humanity (using inmates as experimental animals) than the scientific research.

You missed the point despite the evidences given to you. No surprise there. The Apollo project was not under any dictatorial regime but the project succeeded because the American people felt there was a need for it. They were persuaded to comply with President Kennedy's challenge to the nation. The Manhattan Project which gave US atomic weapons were more inline with the secret Soviet cities that Stalin, a dictator, created. This is not about the final products but about HOW to accomplish what and WHO or rather what type of leadership offers the quickest path to scientific achievements. So the argument that a dictatorial regime is an impediment to scientific achievements is not a valid one. Amazing how people failed to see the obvious.

 

[qsaark]

You missed the point despite the evidences given to you. No surprise there. The Apollo project was not under any dictatorial regime but the project succeeded because the American people felt there was a need for it. They were persuaded to comply with President Kennedy's challenge to the nation. The Manhattan Project which gave US atomic weapons were more inline with the secret Soviet cities that Stalin, a dictator, created. This is not about the final products but about HOW to accomplish what and WHO or rather what type of leadership offers the quickest path to scientific achievements. So the argument that a dictatorial regime is an impediment to scientific achievements is not a valid one. Amazing how people failed to see the obvious.

It is not missing the obvious. It is the simple fact that all these projects were thoroughly discussed in the Congress and in the Senate and the required funds were allocated based on the priorities of that time. It was not the decision of a ‘dictator’ or a ‘dictatorial regime’ to make a nuclear bomb or to make the first Americans land on the moon. It is only an example of intense competition due to the prevailing atmosphere of the cold war and setting the priorities accordingly.

 

[Unbeliever]

A dictatorship is hardly a plus. A free and plural society where everyone can research what he is most interested, the field that is his passion, with no directions or borders a priori in any direction. That is what is required for maximum success and also why pluralistic, liberal democracy are the most successful. Scientific though is most fruitful and nourished by the maximum freedom possible. "Direction" from the government is not required and rather harmful not helpful.

Reality testifies to this being a fact.

 

[qsaark]

A dictatorship is hardly a plus. A free and plural society where everyone can research what he is most interested, the field that is his passion, with no directions or borders a priori in any direction. That is what is required for maximum success and also why pluralistic, liberal democracy are the most successful. Scientific though is most fruitful and nourished by the maximum freedom possible. "Direction" from the government is not required and rather harmful not helpful.

Reality testifies to this being a fact.

Well this is not entirely true. Let me give an example. NIH, UNDP, TWAS etc allocate a significant portion of grant funding for basic and applied research in tropical diseases such as Cholera, Malaria, Schistosomiasis, Leishmaniasis etc. It is fine if the money is plentiful and someone wants to work on the pathogens responsible for these diseases. But the simple fact is, all these disease can easily be controlled, in fact eradicated by simply investing the in the basic infrastructure. Instead of wasting money on making vaccine and developing therapies (millions of dollars have been poured in Malaria and cholera vaccine with no success in past 100 or so years) for the water-borne diseases, a fraction of that money can be used to provide clean drinking water and improving the sanitation. That will automatically result in the reduction and even eradication of such diseases as it happened in the Europe.

However things are not as simple as they appear. There are people who have made their entire careers while working on these problems. If the money goes for improving the infra-structure than these people will lose their jobs. So freedom is fine but only when there is plenty of money at hand. We have to set out priorities, what should be funded first, what should be funded next and where we need not to invest altogether.

My PhD work was on developing a cholera vaccine. I remember during my defense (viva voce), I was more critical of my work than my examiners. At one point they even asked me that if I was so skeptical about the whole approach, why I wasted my four years? For the following two reason I replied to them:

A. To be able to learn the basic and advanced techniques in Molecular Biology and Immunology.

B. To get the PhD; that is more like getting a driving license. Once you get the license, you are free to drive whatever the car you like.

Indeed my two hours long defense pissed my supervisor off but at the end of the day, I had secured my PhD with A plus. Soon after getting my PhD, I left the cholera field and moved to the virology field which is far more important and relevant in today’s world.

 

[Unbeliever]

Okay you are right, resource allocation and incentives is a role government can (and should) play just as a private company. But that has nothing to do with dictatorship. My point was that in a culture were somebody TELLS you what to do, science and technology will not flourish. That of course does not mean that certain areas cannot be incentivised, like we do over here with renewable energy sources that aren't profitable yet.

 

[qsaark]

Okay you are right, resource allocation and incentives is a role government can (and should) play just as a private company. But that has nothing to do with dictatorship. My point was that in a culture were somebody TELLS you what to do, science and technology will not flourish. That of course does not mean that certain areas cannot be incentivised, like we do over here with renewable energy sources that aren't profitable yet.

You are 100% right.

 

[gambit]

Okay you are right, resource allocation and incentives is a role government can (and should) play just as a private company. But that has nothing to do with dictatorship. My point was that in a culture were somebody TELLS you what to do, science and technology will not flourish. That of course does not mean that certain areas cannot be incentivised, like we do over here with renewable energy sources that aren't profitable yet.

A dictatorship, assuming if the dictator himself is sufficiently 'enlightened', can more quickly act to allocate those necessary resources, human and materiels. This is about coercion versus persuasion and which is the quicker path for a project to receive those necessary resources.

The question is 'Why Does the Muslim World Lag in Science?' This is not the deep and dark jungles of Africa but about a society that has several independent countries with wealth, functional governments, access to knowledge, etc...etc...To lag imply a capability that is either insufficiently exploited or not exploited at all. If there are social forces, such as religion, that are prevalent and is dominant, such as the belief of a young Earth over geological evidences that hinted otherwise, then a persuasive regime would not have very good odds of success at either proving or disproving the young Earth belief. A coercive regime, on the other hand, can override any personal biases from the maintainers of these social forces and quickly allocate resources towards a scientific project to either prove or disprove the theory.

If the dictator is of the same mindset of those who maintain a religious belief of a young Earth, then he can also coercively squash any scientific project that could even hint at any other theories. The scientists would have to exercise their own persuasive powers in trying to convince the dictator to allocate resources for their projects. The dictator can give $1 million to the religious leaders to maintain the young Earth theory and give $10 to the scientists for their projects. That is also coercion, of a sort.

Stalin's secret science cities are examples of a coercive regime and Kennedy's Apollo project is an example of a persuasive regime. It is not the final products but the path. So it is clear that living under dictatorships cannot be a legitimate excuse as to 'Why Does the Muslim World Lag in Science?'

 

[muse]

Science, as it's method is understood today, and even by those who suggest that scientific method is itself an anchonism, begin with a need to apply a critical methodology to a particular area of investigation - that word, "investigation" suggests that "truth" remains an "indetermined" characteristic of our reality --

These notions "critical", "indetermined" are anathema to those for whom Certitude is primary. Whereas faith, and for our discussion religious faith (conviction in the absence of confirming circumstance) is founded is rooted in doubt, in that "indetermined".

Readers should review the Nadeem Paracha article "Backwards Forward" once again to better understand why Muslim societies seem to be having such problems with science (investigation, critical, indetermined truth). It has nothing to do with dictatorship or Monarchy or Authoritarianism and everything to do with the nature of knowledge, as suggested by Muslim scholars, a knowledge devoid of the critical, of investigation and one which cannot posit the indetermined universe over the Certitude it finds comforting in the ferment of change.

 

[qsaark]

So it is clear that living under dictatorships cannot be a legitimate excuse as to 'Why Does the Muslim World Lag in Science?

Gambit,

First of all, enlightenment and dictatorship do not go along. If a person was enlightened he would most probably avoid becoming a dictator. Secondly, living under dictator ship and not excelling in R&D is somewhat legitimate an excuse because Dictators invest the resource in empowering their regimes, strengthening the Military through which they rule, and buying the loyalties of people etc. After all these 'spendings' little is left to spend on the social sectors such as health, education let alone the research. Doing Science is not cheap as you may be aware of. In addition to the cost, research is inherently an inefficient process that yields desired results in due course of time.

Good research not only depends on the finances, but a lot on the quality of the researcher (his theoretical understanding about the subject plus the ability to view a problem from various angles) involved as well. Quality researchers are the direct product of good schooling and excellent graduate training. Both of these elements are altogether missing in the majority of the Muslim countries and investment on the basic as well as medium level education was never the priority. A dictator can put 10 people on a single project and pour resources into it but if the quality of the ten is not good, nothing is going to come out.

 

[muse]

The so called Muslim world led the world in sciences during the late Ummayid and middle Abbassi Khalifate - and that it was certainly authoritarian, imperial and dictatorial - why then did the Muslim world lead in sciences in that period???

 

[qsaark]

Muslims have always been ruled by the dictatorial regimes. Except for the sporadic achievements of the middle ages, what we have given to the world in past 500 years? What are the scientific achievements of the Timurid dynasty in the Central Asia, or the Ottoman Empire? Or the Mughals in the Sub-continent?

Science of the middle ages is simply not comparable with the Science of today. Today’s Science is far more competitive, sophisticated and resource and labor intensive. Besides how much can be achieved working under dictatorial regimes (especially the dictatorial regimes in the so-called Muslim world) can easily be seen by picking up few scientific journals.

 

[muse]

That dog won't hunt - the science of the middle ages is not being compared to the science of today - why did Islamiya under dictorial, authoritarian Kahalifate lead the world in sciences - but does not do so now nor has it since the middle ages -- What changed within the world of Islamic scholarship?? Beloved Imam Ghazali played the major role in this transformation - what was this role?

 

[qsaark]

Leading the world, which world? What world are you talking about? Was there a world outside the Islamic Empire? What was the state of Europe in the dark and Middle ages? No central government, the Europeans were dwelling in the villages and trying to survive under the cruel feudals. And when the Europe eventually became a ‘world’ than what happened? Who lead whom?

Nothing has changed for the Muslims, they were living under the dictatorial rule before, they continue to live under the dictatorial rule after that. So where went the Science? If dictatorship is the ‘nuskha kemia’ for excelling in Science and technology than why we are standing no where?

 

[muse]

Now Europe and and world did not exist in the middle ages, there was neither learning nor science in Europe?

"Utopians, when the results of trhe testing of their theories, fails to confirm their theories, change not their theories, but the results of the tests"


Germany under Hitler and the Nazi made great scientific progress, Russian under the murderous dictator Stalin made tremendous progress, Who come?? Islamiya under the Ummayaid and middle Abbassi period saw a flourishing of learning and sciences.

Any way in which you try to spin and blame Dictatorship or any other political dispensation, instead of discussing the reality of a rejection of "critical", "investigation", "indeterminism" and "certitude" - why? what scares you so that we should seek refuge in untenable positons?

 

[qsaark]

You tell me what kind of Science existed in Europe in the middle ages? How many Universities were there?

Germany under Hitler…There was a Germany before Hitler and there was cutting edge Science in German Institutions before Hitler. It is not that soon after Hitler came into power, Germany started pouring out Science.

I have already given several reasons in my previous posts. I am only replying to the point that Dictatorship is not the hurdle in Science, and I am saying it indeed is. In the middle ages it was not that big of a problem because all that a ‘Scientist’ needed from the Emperor or the King was a life long stipend so that he could concentrate on the problem rather than thinking about making ends meat. Today that is not the case. The researchers are paid through the institutions but in order to carry out Science, they depend on the quality of their research proposals/ideas and research grants/fundings in addition to their salary.