No Nobels, We're Muslim

[LaBong]

Such simplistic platitudes don't stand up to scrutiny. China, Israel and the US have very different societies, yet they all do quite well in the scientific field.

Nazi Germany was hardly the epitome of "freedom" yet it singlehandedly matched the entire world in technological strength. The modern aerospace era was launched by Nazi scientists.



Already addressed. The Muslim world sank in all areas of governance. Scientific inquiry was only one casualty, a secondary effect, in a long list.

The same effect is seen in other ancient societies which sank from their zenith: India, China, Persia, Egypt, the Fertile Crescent.

Shall we then say that the culprit was Hinduism or Buddhism or Zoroastrianism or whatever?

It's not Islam, Hinduism or any other religion per se, but religion dictating state affairs and thus putting the sceptics to ignominy, which forms the kernel of the article. It's more true with organized religions which more than often have engaged in power-struggle with the state in last two millennia of Human History.

 

[Hussein]

Nazi Germany was hardly the epitome of "freedom" yet it singlehandedly matched the entire world in technological strength. The modern aerospace era was launched by Nazi scientists.

Yes you are right . They put such an energy to dominate the world and use science for this matter.

But science in Germany was much before the Nazis. THey had the best scientists in that period and the first half of the XIX century. And still now in Europe you can see Germans having a real good scientist education.
renaissance lumieres a good king choice, everything that mattered for a country to go up.
People say here that Germany wanted to be a great nation and understood that they lost the opportunity of colonial territories: french spanish in the past and english took almost all territories. so germany needed to find another way of domination. superiority of technology.

Iran wanted to get nuclear technology at the shah's period. USA didn't like it.
The royalists say it is the main reason why USA didn't help the shah. And Nahavandi explains how Khomeiny was suported by the French government : he got all his communication system from Valerie Giscard d'Estaing president of France.

 

[third eye]

No Nobels for the Muslim world
By Aziz Akhmad
Published: October 6, 2011

The writer was a human resource consultant and is currently based in New York aziz.akhmad@tribune.com.pk

The names of the Nobel Prize winners for 2011 were announced this week in Stockholm, Sweden. That there was no winner from the Muslim world did not surprise anyone.

Since I am not pirvy to the selection process I cannot comment on the hows & whys. I did find the selection of Obama unusual though.

On the subject, I wonder why there is a seperate ' Muslim World' ?

I thought we all lived in the same world. Is there a Hindu / Buddhist / Sikh world ? Then why a Muslim world ?

This sense of self alineation needs to go. So long as we live in silos we shall never integrate.

 

[Developereo]

It's not Islam, Hinduism or any other religion per se, but religion dictating state affairs and thus putting the sceptics to ignominy, which forms the kernel of the article. It's more true with organized religions which more than often have engaged in power-struggle with the state in last two millennia of Human History.

That logic would be appropriate if Islamic empires of the past became theocracies towards the end and collapsed because of that reason. I am no historian, but the impression I got was that they -- the original Caliphates and the Ottoman empire -- collapsed because they had become hollow shells without vitality. I don't know that they were any more religious in their declining days than they were in their heydey.

Hence, it's not clear that religion was a contributing factor in their demise -- any more than it was a factor in the decline of other ancient civilizations.

People say here that Germany wanted to be a great nation and understood that they lost the opportunity of colonial territories: french spanish in the past and english took almost all territories. so germany needed to find another way of domination. superiority of technology.

Survival instinct is a powerful driving force: it drove the Germans, Japanese and Israelis to come back from the brink of extinction.

 

[Safriz]

one thing is sure......its not our education system which is to blame...or perhaps our kids learn too much too soon.
my wife is a science teacher here in manchester and i have taught in a college in uk for some time....science subjects......and our level of education is well above Britains....
Our children go to primary school with science books while here there is no such thing until secondary school and that too at a lower level than ours.

 

[Developereo]

its not our education system which is to blame

From an article by Mosharraf Zaidi (is it 'muse' himself???)

Only way to reform education | Mosharraf Zaidi

In a detailed study of the election manifestoes of the five largest parties for the 2008 elections (PPP, PML-N, PML-Q, MQM and ANP), the Centre for Peace and Development Initiatives (CPDI) finds that while all the parties make overarching commitments to universal education, they are desperately inadequate on details. Most tellingly, not a single one of the political parties talks about governance and administrative issues within the education sector – no discussion of teacher absenteeism, no discussion of training and capacity, no discussion of the need for solid data on education, and no discussion on the system’s accountability to the taxpayer and the parent.

This is the beating heart of the education problem – an unaccountable Pakistani state that pumps insufficient funds into a completely ineffective system of education.

[...]

On any given day in Pakistan, one out of four government school teachers do not show up for work. Given the manner in which teachers are hired, and the purpose that their hiring into government serves for the Pakistani elite, however, it is clear that teacher absenteeism is not an education-sector problem. Teacher absenteeism is an accountability problem. Teachers are overwhelmingly hired as a function of politics. Why would the very politicians that got the teachers their jobs ever have an incentive to hold those teachers to account? They would not.

 

[Tiger Awan]

From an article by Mosharraf Zaidi (is it 'muse' himself???)

Only way to reform education | Mosharraf Zaidi

In a detailed study of the election manifestoes of the five largest parties for the 2008 elections (PPP, PML-N, PML-Q, MQM and ANP), the Centre for Peace and Development Initiatives (CPDI) finds that while all the parties make overarching commitments to universal education, they are desperately inadequate on details. Most tellingly, not a single one of the political parties talks about governance and administrative issues within the education sector – no discussion of teacher absenteeism, no discussion of training and capacity, no discussion of the need for solid data on education, and no discussion on the system’s accountability to the taxpayer and the parent.

This is the beating heart of the education problem – an unaccountable Pakistani state that pumps insufficient funds into a completely ineffective system of education.

[...]

On any given day in Pakistan, one out of four government school teachers do not show up for work. Given the manner in which teachers are hired, and the purpose that their hiring into government serves for the Pakistani elite, however, it is clear that teacher absenteeism is not an education-sector problem. Teacher absenteeism is an accountability problem. Teachers are overwhelmingly hired as a function of politics. Why would the very politicians that got the teachers their jobs ever have an incentive to hold those teachers to account? They would not.

Question is the one teacher who is present (and most probably teaching 3 or 4 subjects) is qualified or not?

 

[Safriz]

^^^unlike europe.....its the people not government who is pumping their money in education...
where in europe most of children go to paid private schools? nowhere....
only few rich elite send their kids to private schools....
on the contrary..in pakistan ..most people send their kids to private schools.
so if you tot up the fees people pay to private schools....that will be billions..
so money is abundantly being spent on education in pakistan....

 

[Tiger Awan]

^^^unlike europe.....its the people not government who is pumping their money in education...
where in europe most of children go to paid private schools? nowhere....
only few rich elite send their kids to private schools....
on the contrary..in pakistan ..most people send their kids to private schools.
so if you tot up the fees people pay to private schools....that will be billions..
so money is abundantly being spent on education in pakistan....

who will send their children to mismanaged schools?

 

[harpoon]

one thing is sure......its not our education system which is to blame...or perhaps our kids learn too much too soon.
my wife is a science teacher here in manchester and i have taught in a college in uk for some time....science subjects......and our level of education is well above Britains....
Our children go to primary school with science books while here there is no such thing until secondary school and that too at a lower level than ours.

In India many educationists are of the opinion that Indian education system is still caught up in the time frame when British used to run things and their principal aim was to mass produce clerks/assistants to help the colonial masters to run things. So our education system is highly theoretical with no encouragement given to creative thinking ,afterall 'creative thinking' was the job of the British.

Like you many in India also takes pride in the fact that our syllabus is very much advanced when compared to the West, but my question is so what? With a 'low level' scientific education(according to you) the westerners manage to do far more research and bag far more Nobel prizes than India or Pakistan year after year.

---------- Post added at 03:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:31 PM ----------

^^^unlike europe.....its the people not government who is pumping their money in education...
where in europe most of children go to paid private schools? nowhere....
only few rich elite send their kids to private schools....
on the contrary..in pakistan ..most people send their kids to private schools.
so if you tot up the fees people pay to private schools....that will be billions..
so money is abundantly being spent on education in pakistan....

Most of the prestigious academies in Europe where the rich and famous send their children to study is still private.

 

[Hussein]

Most of the prestigious academies in Europe where the rich and famous send their children to study is still private.

Probably. Just an exception in France: the most prestigious schools are public:
polytechnique, the best one is ENS (for research excellent level)
and for preparation for the "grandes ecoles" (prestigious engineer schools equivalent of best universities):
the best are public: louis le grand for exemple in paris

 

[Developereo]

^^^unlike europe.....its the people not government who is pumping their money in education...
where in europe most of children go to paid private schools? nowhere....
only few rich elite send their kids to private schools....
on the contrary..in pakistan ..most people send their kids to private schools.
so if you tot up the fees people pay to private schools....that will be billions..
so money is abundantly being spent on education in pakistan....

According to that article, 33 percent of education in Pakistan is private. You don't see that as a problem of governance?

Also, I would bet that most of that private education is at the primary and secondary school level. This is not the stage for scientific discoveries. It only prepares you for further studies at the graduate and post-graduate level and beyond, where the cutting edge of science lies.

What are the options for education and research at that level in Pakistan? Up to what point can you keep constructing a parallel private society because the state has failed in its duties. As you yourself stated, people leave the country because they see few options.

 

[MilSpec]

Thank you friends and others, for your responses - Allow me to deal with some of the issues raised, lets first deal with the meaning of the Nobel, at least for the purposes of this thread :

The Nobel only means that achievement in the fields of the expansion of the human experience - is Nobel, political, sure, but SCIENCE is not open to the considerations that effect politics - Scientific discovery and research are beyond, who lies or dislikes it, it is beyond even good or bad, and right and wrong.

So what we are looking for is achievement, to be considered with the rest, to compete, to expand the experience of reality for ALL.

Now lets come to the second major objection our friends and others have raised -- that suggesting Muslims have not accomplished much this the heydays of Baghdad is Anti-Islam

Those who wish us to take their position seriously must produce ARGUMENTS to support their positions - See, friends, either there was achievement or there was not - and these two are obvious.

But those who argue that scientific accomplishment is against Islam, must explain, which Islam they are talking about? after all we are all in agreement that from the advent of Islam to the 12 or 13 century, Islam was the motivation and catalyst of scientific discovery and innovation - so they must explain what changed and why the period from the advent of Islam to the 13 century was Anti-Islamic -- and we will allow them ever space, every privilege, every accommodation and will eagerly examine their arguments, in particular their explanation of how and why the period from the advent of Islam to the 13 century, was Anti-Islam.

We encourage any and all to take this challenge and also encourage them to read "The Responsibility of Muslim Intellectuals" in our post number 22 on page one of this thread - because our defense will derive from that exposition - so please do take this opportunity to persuade --- No expressions of sentiment or emotion, please make arguments, please explain the criteria for your position - happy reading - we look forward to your arguments

Science comes from the urge for development. Development is possible in states which has long periods of economic prosperity and peace. Christian nations in early 16th century could bring about its power projection around the world with the help of its naval forces. Thus all the battles were being fought in asia middle east south america and african colonies, effectively taking most of the battles and conquest away from europe. This gave europe a solid 400 year jump start for developing it's culture and society leading to innovation and technology.

Every kingdom in europe also had the aspirations on dominating the world by adding more colonies hence very large incentives were placed on technology related to farming, military and transport.. three major reasons for their growth. US got the best of european culture due to mass immigration which lead to very healthy ties to Europe in last two centuries.

Asian/African/latin american regions had no sense of union to begin with.. the landscape was scattered with few major kingdoms fighting among themselves based on religious and ethnic differences, rest of the geography was filled with tribesmen and clans. Areas that did see peace for longer periods developed rich cultural heritage and brought us innovations in metal working, gun powder, mathematics astronomy, taxonomy but all this ended with European colonization. nearly 100-200 years was stolen from these lands by powerful European economies due to better political management of the west.

Religion:
Although religion did place some hurdels in innovation, it mainly remained in the context of astronomy & biology.
Islam, Hinduism, Christianity judaism never ever interfered with the science of key technologies of 300 years ago which ensured the dominance of europe over the world. these religion never stood in the way of material science, naval engineering, navigational techniques, transport system, military innovations.


We must look at the bigger picture here... in the iron age and bronze age Europeans were in chaos and conflict.. new worlds like america and australia were still primitive while Chinese and indian subcontinental culture was thriving... this comfort and enormous wealth made the rulers lazy and brought about their fall ... europeans especially the british and the french had their share of success in colonial times, world war II brought about the end of that... US was the country untouched by WWII and saw incredible growth and accumulation of wealth and stability ... next cataclysm will bring forth a different leader... peace time leads to urge for development which results in better technology and infrastructure.. Religion does not play any role in a society's development in technology.

 

[Safriz]

^^^ we are good at finding all the wrong reasons for our problems...arent we?
the main reason why west is years ahead of us is the capability to "adopt and survive" according to prevailing circumstances.
we remain stuck in our troubles and find scape goats.
i start with loadshedding in Pakistan...
all of the country suffered from it but how many of 180 million of us actually tried to find an alternative way of power production?
how many people or corporates tried to build a wind turbine...or a low cost solar cell..or another innovative way of power production?

none.

who is to blame for a brain dead nation who cant be arsed to even try find a solution to a problem they face everyday?

 

[muse]

More Interesting responses - Hossein says:

that's the problem of people who prefer use their anti islam feeling to understand
in the history with Islam our countries were great developing science much more than europe, before the "renaissance"
so i wonder why it is linked to islam?
many explanations were given but if you don't want to read of course you won't find it

In other words, the period from the advent of Islam to the 13 century when Islam and Muslims led in science and innovation, had nothing to do with Islam?? Hiding behind the skirts of "anti-Islam" will not suffice. We have higher expectations from you.

Develepero argues that it is bad governance - and offer the example of the state of education in Pakistan as an example and explanation - Yet, does this mean that Muslims have suffered from bad governance since the 13th century?????

PakShah says :

The reason the western world is leading in science and technology is because of:
1) After the fall of the Byzantine Empire, educated Greeks went to Europe and taught in European universities. Example: Demetrios Chalkokondyles. Knowledge that was previously lost on the ancient Roman empire was somewhat mitigated if not completely recovered when Greeks taught in European universities.
This helped speed the Renaissance in Europe.

Yes, How does this explain, Why and how Muslims lost their lead??

Sandy offers an explanation, again, outwardly focused, that is to say Colonialism and what he says is the "urge for Development" and says:

Science comes from the urge for development. Development is possible in states which has long periods of economic prosperity and peace. Christian nations in early 16th century could bring about its power projection around the world with the help of its naval forces. Thus all the battles were being fought in asia middle east south america and african colonies, effectively taking most of the battles and conquest away from europe. This gave europe a solid 400 year jump start for developing it's culture and society leading to innovation and technology.

What is this "urge for Development"? If there is such an urge, and it was present from the advent of Islam to the 13 century, what happened to this urge after the 13 century and why?

See in your notion of "urge for development", there is a more interesting ideas, lets explore it -- would you think we may use the notion of "progress" as a synonym for "urge for development? - So what happened to this ideas after the 13 century among Muslims? What killed this idea? What made the intellectual environment in Muslims lands inhospitable to this idea that it lost legitimacy and migrated to more hospitable areas, to be rediscovered in Europe and ignite the Renaissance? What does Renaissance mean anyway??

Friends, in the article "Responsibility of Muslim Intellectuals" (see post number 22) Farish Noor and Abdolkarim speak of "Epistemological" divergence when discussing Islam and modernity - What is this "Epistemology"?? What is the relationship between Epistemology and the creation of knowledge or the lack of creation of knowledge (Sandy, this is a huge ISHARA, I hope you will pick this up and run with it) What is the relationship between the creation of knowledge or lack thereof, and the idea of progress or "urge for development" and lack thereof??