Why Does the Muslim World Lag in Science?

[muse]

There was a Germany before Hitler and there was cutting edge Science in German Institutions before Hitler

So there was no learning or science in Islamiyah before the Ummayid or Abbassi khalifat and none afterwards?

Look you are a trained scientist, why is it that you refuse to acknowledge that any field of scientific endeavor starts with what we say is the nature of knowledge and the role of "critical", investigation" and "indeterminism" and the role of certitude??

Does knowledge grow and contract? Obviously it does, right? What does that say about the nature of knowledge?

If the understanding of the universe is characterized by "indeterminism" what implication does that have for those who suggest that it "Certitude" with which we should approach the understanding of the universe??

I think if you as a trained scientist and a responsible Muslim should approach this question you may help others better understand the question and answers with regard to this thread. It's pointless to evade this basic problem by seeking refuge in untenable positions.

 

[oct605032048]

science is the fastest way to burn up money and no money no science.

 

[TruthSeeker]

qsaark,
Of the many people who post on this Forum, you are, perhaps, the most knowledgeable in both successful, competitive "Western" science, and in a scholarly understanding of Islam. So, with your scientific career experience, and with your Islamic knowledge, what would have to change in a rich Islamic country, say, like Saudi Arabia, that has the financial resources to fund world class science, to, in fact, be a nurturer of world class science? Why can't you do the equivalent world class research that you do in Atlanta in some wealthy nation in the Islamic world?

 

[SandsofTime]

qsaark,
Of the many people who post on this Forum, you are, perhaps, the most knowledgeable in both successful, competitive "Western" science, and in a scholarly understanding of Islam. So, with your scientific career experience, and with your Islamic knowledge, what would have to change in a rich Islamic country, say, like Saudi Arabia, that has the financial resources to fund world class science, to, in fact, be a nurturer of world class science? Why can't you do the equivalent world class research that you do in Atlanta in some wealthy nation in the Islamic world?

I am doing research work myself, so pardon me if I may discuss some of my own opinion. For one thing, many rich Muslim countries are rich because of oil (leave aside Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey). Because of this easily available cash they have no idea how to set priorities to undertake scientific endeavors. Many of these countries are entrenched in monarchy and conservatism, because of which these societies change very slowly. Citizens of these countries acknowledge importance of scientific research but are hardly concerned about how to realize their potential. Most are just too happy with the status quo which means easy money and luxurious lifestyle funded by petro dollars. These societies will need to first undergo some evolution before the appropriate support base and social values are created to emphasize investment of resources in these areas.

For a researcher to succeed in Saudi Arab for instance, not only are facilities required but also a supportive attitude by the university administration. Strict policies that discourage plagiarsim and promote creativity and good research students are also needed for research assistant jobs.

 

[muse]

Many of these countries are entrenched in monarchy and conservatism, because of which these societies change very slowly.

Fair enough, so for the most part these are authoritarian societies - but so was Stalin's Russia, so is by and large China - How do you explain their rise in science?? For instance China was way behind India, is that the case now? Why??

 

[eastwatch]

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?

Whatever the scientists of Hitler's Germany achieved in the middle 20th century was based on the scientific achievements before that time. Scientific development is a continuous process. It started at some time in the history, but it will keep on improving until Qayamat.

Some branches of science may not need any more development, but then, some other new branches of science will come to the forefront and the scientists will keep on working on these new branches.

Now, the question is where the Muslims scientists fit in the development of different branches of science. There was a time the Muslim scientists studied the Indian and Greek sciences, kept on doing fundamental researches on these and published books on their achievements. Many of these knowledges were again researched and improved by the europeans. They have taken the sciences almost to their zenith.

However, when in the middle ages, the europeans started to learn the sciences from the texts written by the Muslims, the Muslims themselves started to de-learn these. I can pinpoint a historical event from which this trend started. It was the assault of Baghdad in 1258 by the notorious Mongolian Halaku Khan. He not only destroyed the wold's largest City, he also burned down all the libraries in that City and with these all the books of knowledge.

The persons of knowledge, but now destitute, had to scatter out of Baghdad, because of that invasion. Baghdad never regained its former status as the center of learning. I must admit that not all the scientists were living only in Baghdad, but all of them were dependent upon the Administrative and financial assistance provided by that City, the seat of Islamic Khilafat.

This was the starting point of decline of not only the Muslim power, but also the Muslim scientific research works. Islamic empires were still there in india, asia, africa and europe, but these were just the administrative centers and not knowledge centers. I have no knowledge that the Hindustani Muslims ever went after any scientific research works, although the present day Afghanistan had a few scientists.

It is becoming a long post. I am a late joiner in this thread, so I will stop here so that you do not get disturbed. I am here to learn from all of you. Thanks.

 

[SandsofTime]

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.

That as you mentioned heavily depends on the dictators personal abilities. In fact, there has been a study in Game theory economics that an efficient dictatorial regime can be more productive than a democratic one (reference needed). This presumes the existence of a perfect dictator though. But Stalin is not such an efficient dictator as you are portraying. In the end didn't USSR go on to be bankrupt. This is the long term problem with dictatorships where the individual may lose sense of ground conditions and start being unrealistic. Hence dictatorial regimes are not ideal in the long run. (I am saying this despite being a supporter of Musharraf's policies )

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.

First of all these factors are only relevant to fields which are at odds with traditional interpretation of religion, such as evolution or geological history. Modern research is highly compartmentalized with most researchers having nothing to do with these controversial fields. In fact, most research is about obsessing oneself with minute details of a limited number of things. A computer vision scientist like myself (to be in future ) obsesses day in day out about all possible ways to tweak mathematical models for specialized applications like tracking of cells in microscopy. I don't see how that would affect my research were I to believe in 5000 year old earth (I don't btw). Thus forcing a belief down someone's throat is not going to magically transform someone in to a good researcher. In fact some of the most famous scientists and mathematicians in history held deep religious beliefs (though at odds with established orthodoxy). Newton, Leibniz, Beiruni, Ibn Sina, Euler, Gauss, etc all were religiously inclined (history buffs correct me on the names here, but I know for sure there is a big list of religious scientists). On the other hand many of my university profs tend to be much less religious. Yet we have a devoted Muslim community here who pray regularly and do excellent research (some of these are women doing some hardcore math research). I am sure many of them would have their own biases and personal beliefs, but these trends only reflect social values and doesn't impact in any big way upon their research work.

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.

Most of the time political leadership is completely clueless about how certain research can contradict their personal beliefs. Moreover in this case wouldn't a democracy be better, since it would have a lower to tendency to shutdown "offending" projects.

 

[SandsofTime]

Fair enough, so for the most part these are authoritarian societies - but so was Stalin's Russia, so is by and large China - How do you explain their rise in science?? For instance China was way behind India, is that the case now? Why??

Admittedly Russians have some of the brightest mathematicians in their bags. In fact a lot of the stuff is being rediscovered after a long time by people here in the West since many of the publications in Russian language are never translated into English. But as far as I know the credit for this goes more to an earlier generation of Russian mathematicians who personally took over mentoring of young promising children. Research is not a factory where you can increase productivity simply by flooding with resources. A lot of the paths in research lead to dead ends. So many research papers are published yet only a few make it to significance, while the others are relegated to archives (perhaps to be later revived in case some one else digs deeper). It is inherently a risky activity with no guaranteed payoffs. Under these situations it is best left to individuals to decide for themselves what they would like to work on since this is the only way to motivate people over the long run. Funding of course can be fine tuned as per budget constraints and priorities, but there shouldn't be any hard limits.

China is not advanced in scientific output yet. The advances which you are referring to are economic. This is despite the presence of many excellent Chinese researchers, most of whom choose to remain in the West, including my own prof who is from Hong Kong. So you cannot use this example for now. In the future this would of course change with more educated people returning back to their home countries. But as I have spoken to some of my Chinese lab fellows, even they expect China to shift to full democracy sooner or later.

In any case, my point is not to relate dictatorship to decline of science and democracy with vice versa, since we can always come up with counter examples (Pakistan anyone ). The most important thing in scientific endeavors is the individual himself. There needs to be an insatiable curiosity to discover and a burning desire in the heart to solve problems. Only with such persistence can an individual burn the "midnight oil" to read hundreds of mind numbingly complex research papers in order to further research. These are the values we need to inculcate, encourage and promote in our children. People with these qualities exist in all societies. It all matters how good are the elders and society at spotting inherent aptitude and polishing it. This is the thing in my opinion which is holding back Muslim countries from achieving its talent potential. This can be done even with scarcity of resources if the individual is given sufficient motivation. A shining modern example of triumph of talent over adversity can be found in the life history of Ramanujan. Its only that our priorities as a society are all messed up.

 

[muse]

One excuse after another, first it's mongols and not Imam Ghazali's attack on inquiry - then it's dictatorship.

Listen guys, Who was Abdus Salam?? The only Pakistani Nobel prize winner -- and what happened to him?? Is he recognized in Pakistan?? Why not? is it any other than his confession?? Why do you suppose religion became so important that we refuse to recognize scientific achievement?? What does it say about the regard we hold science in?

 

[Developereo]

Societies, like individuals, will never improve until they change their mindset. As long as we keep looking for excuses for failure, we continue to fail; and the reverse applies equally well.

All the "experts" kept saying how democracy and open societies are essential for investment and sustained economic growth, but China ignored them and proved them wrong. Similarly, Germany and Japan rose from their ashes to become powerhouses. Japan did it with hardly any natural resources, and Germany has repeated the feat at least three times (1871, WW1, WW2).

Meanwhile, most of the countries in the third world remain basketcases...

In the context of Pakistan, our problem isn't democracy, dictatorship or poverty. It's a question of attitude. Do we have educational, religious and media leaders who instill a sense of patriotism, hope and purpose into the population? Do they encourage their audience to form citizen groups to build schools and clinics, promote community competitions in science and scholarship, or organize marches to celebrate national unity in our ethnic and religious diversity?

Does the media make heroes of schoolkids who excel academically, and scientists who achieve international recognition? When we finally had a Physics Nobel laureate, we promptly disowned him because he wasn't "really a Muslim".

 

[SandsofTime]

Unfortunately Muslims are so brainwashed with religious indoctrination, that many people are unable to think of any problem outside a religious context.

......
What on earth does religion have to do with learning quantum mechanics or plate tectonics?

Ignorance runs high in our societies, but then again ignorance is also present even in developed nations. My question is do these ignorant nuts ever actually do scientific research. These are the people who are happy living their lives in a shell and don't contribute to productivity. People who are truly dedicated to science find a way to get over their personal biases and manage to reconcile their beliefs with their research conclusions. There are Muslim scientists working in evolution theory who are both religious yet open scientific inquiry.

People who are dumb will remain so and they will continue to preach ignorance. Best thing is to just ignore them.

 

[SandsofTime]

The case of Abdus Salam is indeed very unfortunate. By the sort of treatment meted out to him we have set a very bad example for our children. This is a result of decades of indoctrination and brainwashing taking place mainly through our school textbooks. Muse you are right this shows our priorities for learning are only superficial. You would see it day in day out when people are forced into the traditional professions of "Engineering" and "Medicine" when they are not really motivated to do this stuff, leading to a decline in classroom academic standards. Personal beliefs do not however interfere with progress as long as people are taught to be pluralistic and respectful of others, and not to shoot others down for petty differences. Its social priorities that matter. An overhaul is certainly needed here.

 

[gambit]

All the "experts" kept saying how democracy and open societies are essential for investment and sustained economic growth, but China ignored them and proved them wrong.

An 'open' market is a democratic market and that is exactly what China did -- opened her market -- to foreign investments. So the experts remained correct.

 

[gogbot]

Maybe A Religious group, should be more concerned with the matter of faith, rather than the matter of Fact.

If you want to see scientific progress
Then you must first see things from a more scientific perspective.

 

[eastwatch]

Maybe A Religious group, should be more concerned with the matter of faith, rather than the matter of Fact.

If you want to see scientific progress
Then you must first see things from a more scientific perspective.

Yes, a theology text book should not be confused with a book of science. A person should have a two-chamber mind, so as not to get confused.