Religious extremists hate/fear of modern science

[tab1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_thesis

This is what the topic is about, so you can call off the anti Muslim brigade, I have found something to read up on rarther than sit here arguing about your self importance as being a Muslim and how much the world hates you for it.

 

By the way, check the link out, It kind of up holds the topics theme and may shed some like for you that religion does in fact have problems with science.

 

good look on weeding out any other closet Islamaphobes on your quest to stifal any debate that may be about religion and yours imparticular.

. Your first sentence about calling off the anti Islam brigade doesn't make sense h2m they are your cheerleaders I didn't invite them to the party.

 

Anyway thank you for clarifying that and let me put you out of your misery dear h2m, here is a quote from the link that you gave declaring that this is what the topic was about, please read the last bit here

Origins

 

The scientist John William Draper and the intellectual Andrew Dickson White were the most influential exponents of the Conflict Thesis between religion and science. In the early 1870s, Draper was invited to write a History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874), a book replying to contemporary papal edicts such as the doctrine of infallibility, and mostly criticising the anti-intellectualism of Roman Catholicism, [5] yet he assessed that Islam and Protestantism had little conflict with science. Draper’s preface summarises the conflict thesis

Yet you seem to want to place Islam in the dock from a perspective that is rather suspect to say the least. So much for an honest discussion hey?

[flamingjimmy]

you're now despite explanations to the contrary trying to tell me what I meant, when in reality it was your own blinkers that obscured your understanding of what I had said.

sure, that's exactly right.

 

you're now despite explanaThat is one desperate attempt to sidetrack the argument yet you have no time to answer a request to educate us on the principle of first cause, totally understandable why you don't wish to argue.......init?

Not sidetracking, ending. I'll see you on the first cause thread when you get around to starting it.

[skippy_54]

Science has recently discovered that religious people are wired up different to none religious people.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=brain-surgery-boosts-spiritual

The authors pinpointed two parts of the brain,when damaged,led to increases

in spiritualaity:

 

So this must mean brain damaged people are spiritual,I have been saying this for years,now some jumped up nuroscientist from Italy steals my idea and hits the headlines with it no doubt he has been paid vast sums of money to find this out.

[Wildcat]

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/draper00.htm

Theres loads of stuff suggesting and showing examples of science and religion in conflict.

 

For contrast, here is an example of the way religious writings have anticipated modern conceptions like wave theory.

 

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Fritjof-Capra.htm

 

It is through the metaphysics of mysticism that the transition from a Newtonian model became possible.

 

As Einstein put it: 'I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.'

[Baz1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_thesis

This is what the topic is about, so you can call off the anti Muslim brigade, I have found something to read up on rarther than sit here arguing about your self importance as being a Muslim and how much the world hates you for it.

 

By the way, check the link out, It kind of up holds the topics theme and may shed some like for you that religion does in fact have problems with science.

 

good look on weeding out any other closet Islamaphobes on your quest to stifal any debate that may be about religion and yours imparticular.

 

. Your first sentence about calling off the anti Islam brigade doesn't make sense h2m they are your cheerleaders I didn't invite them to the party.

 

Anyway thank you for clarifying that and let me put you out of your misery dear h2m, here is a quote from the link that you gave declaring that this is what the topic was about, please read the last bit here

 

H2M I am affraid you have missed the nail here and tab1 is correct.

 

In the whole of Islamic history there has never been an incident like that of Galileo or Giordano Bruno. There has been persecution and denunciations etc,

over doctrinal differences, but never for scientific beliefs.

 

Remember, if it wasn't for the early arab scholars, Europe would still be left in the Dark Ages- as they contributed massively to translating Greek writings (which they inherited) and over time Europe modernised it and advanced.

 

I accept Islamic science declined (probably from 15th Century) but there are many contributors to this- including invasions by the likes of Genghis Khan- but that is a different subject which is not fitting to this topic.

 

But suffice to say, Islam (via the Quran) is what propels muslims to learn and study- this is how after the Greek era, you had the period where Jabir,Kharizmi, Razi,Masudi, Abu'I-Wafa, Al Biruni, Omar Khayam etc continued to develop science. In those 350 years or so, Arabs, Turks,Afghans and Persians chemists, algebraists, clinicians, geographers, mathematicians,

physicists and astronomers of the commonwealth of Islam-held the world stage ofsciences.

 

The Quran emphasizes the superiority of the 'learned'-the man possessed of knowledge and insight, asking: How can those, not possessing these attributes, ever be equals of those who do? Seven hundred and fifty verses of the Quran (almost one-eighth of the Book) exhort believers to study Nature, to reflect, to make the best use of reason in their search for the ultimate and to make the acquiring of knowledge and scientific comprehension part of the community's life.

 

This is why Islam continues to rise because it fits with mans nature- the Quran literally asks you to go and search and look- study, observe etc.

 

Final point is a rebut to Bloomido's post- trying to argue that because the Quran mentions something that we today call Quantum Physics, muslims use it as a way to say that it was in there all those years- well technically speaking,that is the purpose of the Quran. It mentioned things which was either unheard of then or very little was known of it.

 

There was a well-known theory of atomism advanced by the Greek philosopher, Democritus. He and the people who came after him assumed that matter consists of tiny, indestructible, indivisible particles called atoms. The Arabs too, used to deal in the same concept; in fact, the Arabic word "dharrah" commonly referred to the smallest particle known to man.Now, modern science has discovered that this smallest unit of matter (i.e. the atom,which has all of the same properties as its element) can be split into its component parts.This is a new idea, a development of the last century; yet, interestingly enough, this

information had already been documented in the Qur'an which states:

"He [i.e., Allah] is aware of an atom's weight in the heavens and on the earth and even anything smaller than that..."

 

Undoubtedly, fourteen centuries ago that statement would have looked unusual, even to an Arab. For him, the dharrah was the smallest thing there was. Indeed, this is proof, that the Qur'an is not outdated.

[Baz1]

H2M I am affraid you have missed the nail here and tab1 is correct.

 

In the whole of Islamic history there has never been an incident like that of Galileo or Giordano Bruno. There has been persecution and denunciations etc,

over doctrinal differences, but never for scientific beliefs.

 

Remember, if it wasn't for the early arab scholars, Europe would still be left in the Dark Ages- as they contributed massively to translating Greek writings (which they inherited) and over time Europe modernised it and advanced.

 

I accept Islamic science declined (probably from 15th Century) but there are many contributors to this- including invasions by the likes of Genghis Khan- but that is a different subject which is not fitting to this topic.

 

But suffice to say, Islam (via the Quran) is what propels muslims to learn and study- this is how after the Greek era, you had the period where Jabir,Kharizmi, Razi,Masudi, Abu'I-Wafa, Al Biruni, Omar Khayam etc continued to develop science. In those 350 years or so, Arabs, Turks,Afghans and Persians chemists, algebraists, clinicians, geographers, mathematicians,

physicists and astronomers of the commonwealth of Islam-held the world stage ofsciences.

 

The Quran emphasizes the superiority of the 'learned'-the man possessed of knowledge and insight, asking: How can those, not possessing these attributes, ever be equals of those who do? Seven hundred and fifty verses of the Quran (almost one-eighth of the Book) exhort believers to study Nature, to reflect, to make the best use of reason in their search for the ultimate and to make the acquiring of knowledge and scientific comprehension part of the community's life.

 

This is why Islam continues to rise because it fits with mans nature- the Quran literally asks you to go and search and look- study, observe etc.

 

Final point is a rebut to Bloomido's post- trying to argue that because the Quran mentions something that we today call Quantum Physics, muslims use it as a way to say that it was in there all those years- well technically speaking,that is the purpose of the Quran. It mentioned things which was either unheard of then or very little was known of it.

 

There was a well-known theory of atomism advanced by the Greek philosopher, Democritus. He and the people who came after him assumed that matter consists of tiny, indestructible, indivisible particles called atoms. The Arabs too, used to deal in the same concept; in fact, the Arabic word "dharrah" commonly referred to the smallest particle known to man.Now, modern science has discovered that this smallest unit of matter (i.e. the atom,which has all of the same properties as its element) can be split into its component parts.This is a new idea, a development of the last century; yet, interestingly enough, this

information had already been documented in the Qur'an which states:

 

 

Undoubtedly, fourteen centuries ago that statement would have looked unusual, even to an Arab. For him, the dharrah was the smallest thing there was. Indeed, this is proof, that the Qur'an is not outdated.

 

Of course you will get people who will go ahead and try to break down anything that 'appears' to be out of line with their thinking- and they do. But what is interesting of all, is that all the verses in the Quran, especially those which have a scientific reasoning, could not have been made by a man from the desert who was illiterate-uneducated- and if one wants to assume he was learned, how did he know of things that was not known AT THAT TIME.

 

So hence, again, it is this sort of opening offer that Quran makes- even telling readers that 'Muhammad does not know these things' and even the great learned arabs in his time, could not match the fluency and consistency of the Quran then- and no one has managed to do so after 1400 yrs- so again, this is another reason why the Quran captures the mind and tackles the intellect- encourages you to read and learn and 'go find the facts' as well as 'bring a challenge if you can' and 'and produce a like of this Quran'.

 

No one could (the greatest arab poets in that era), no one did and no one can to this date. So one of the reasons there are a lot of muslim converts, is the because of the Quran. Its not simply looking at an English translation and thinking, so? The Quran was revealed in arabic- because it was the language of the people and they had the best arab poets and scribes- so the challenge was out there from day one to them. Those who embraced Islam were arabs themselves and learned- they knew this was something completely different.

 

That is why it makes muslims laugh when non muslims come on and try to throw a few quotes in and think they know best- when not one of you can write a single line in arabic.

[flamingjimmy]

snip waffling nonsense about how Islam is actually totally scientific:rolleyes:

 

What about evolution Baz?

 

Are you going to embrace the science or try to suppress it?

[tab1]

What about evolution Baz?

 

Are you going to embrace the science or try to suppress it?

You do have a belief after all Jimmy boy, a belief that you are always right.

[flamingjimmy]

snip personal insult

 

not interested. Bazooka my question was for you.

[tab1]

What about evolution Baz?

 

Are you going to embrace the science or try to suppress it?

What about evolution? I thought you weren't interested in discussing anything else other than the topic, isn't evolution closer to the subject of principle of first cause than the topic title? You keep introducing extra subjects when it suits you kid. Then do a prompt runner when asked to explain something. It seems easier for you to jump in and dish out insults and disregard any other viewpoint other than your own as nonsense.

 

By the way Bazooka clearly demonstrated Islam isn't about suppressing science, so what deficiency of understanding do you suffer from in asking such an absurd question, especially after reading his post, or haven't you read it?