No Nobels, We're Muslim

[roadrunner]

True. The thread itself is irrational. Muslims are economically at a low point in history. So where are the Nobel Prizes supposed to come from?

 

[Developereo]

You are arguing with the wrong people !!!!!!

I keep pointing out historical patterns throughout human history, and they come up with opinion pieces and interviews!!!

It's like some people have already formed a conclusion and are jumping through hoops to justify their predetermined conclusion. In the process, they ignore history, contempotary societies across the globe, and anything else that doesn't fit into the circular chain of logic.

It's more about pushing an agenda than actually debating the facts.

 

[Roybot]

Didn't Abdus Salam win a Nobel prize in physics?

 

[roadrunner]

He did. He was also Head of Suparco and awarded many medals.

 

[MilSpec]

He did. He was also Head of Suparco and awarded many medals.

what happened to him?

 

[lkozhi]

another point i think is the issue of lack of funding for pure research in countries like india and pakistan.We have asians being awarded nobel when they worked on significant projects.
Can any one name a person who deserves nobel in india or pakistan like a physicist or mathematician of astounding contribution.

 

[Thorough Pro]

What do you expect with this award,Obama won the Peace Award.

hahaha........................

 

[muse]

Sandy

Please refer to post 169

You note that suggestion of good governance is simply rubbish - as you have suggested islamic caliphate was no means a monolith and it simply stupid to posit that a present day notion such as good governance can explain why knowledge was created and innovation flourished from the advent of islam till the 13 century but then bad governance took over and we got what we have.

From the advent of Islam til the 13 century, religious scholars were open to learning, indeed the political establishment offered no resistance to learning and what resistance there was came from religious authorities and scholars - however, the rationalist mutazzalite movement was seen as excessive and heavy handed and this engendered a reaction among conservative clergy - it is this reaction that is responsible for the decline of muslims as leaders i the fields of sciences and innovation -- what ever happened to Ijtehad? When were the gates to ijtehad closed? Why?

Some such as Develeopero offer us the theory of everything in governance, as is Islam has no relationship with Muslims - after all we are arguing why muslims led in the field of sciences from the advent of Islam till the 13 century and declined afterwards, not Africans and Europeans and such - it cannot be escaped, this relationship between Muslims and Islam.

Please review these:

Q: Yet science has done well under totalitarian regimes in China and the former Soviet Union, and even under some fairly unpleasant governments during Islam's "golden age of science" between the 9th and 13th centuries...

Let me make a distinction between empirical research and thinking per se. Thinking needs a free environment. Empirical research, where you have a well-defined project with official approval, can indeed flourish even under a totalitarian regime, because scientists can still meet other scientists, read the literature and publish. But it is impossible to advance new theories - particularly in the social sciences - when you are under the influence of a particular view, or under the pressure of a particular dogma. And I disagree with you about Islam's golden age. Totalitarianism is absolutely a modern phenomenon. In the past, kings were despots but they were not totalitarian. They weren't able to put their hands on science and philosophy. There was no widespread plan to limit scientists, philosophers and other academics. If there were restrictions, they came from religion or fellow philosophers rather than the political system.

This "influence of a particular view" is in fact the orthodoxy imposed on Muslims by reactionary religious scholars and their political fellow travelers - it is this that is responsible for the decline of Muslims in the fields of sciences and innovation, because the orthodoxy regards sciences and innovation with deep suspicion.
"

 

[Vinod2070]

The only contortion here is the circular argument being championed in the face of historical facts. Facts that simply do not stack up to the assertion.

Bottom line: Muslim scientists and artists flourished during a certain period of Islam's history. What was special about that period? It was a period of stable governance.

This explanation is obviously incomplete. There have been stable Muslim governments later as well.

The Ottoman empire was fairly stable for a long period as well. Yet it didn't do well in Sciences.

Stability may be a necessary condition but not sufficient condition for scientific innovation.

We can continue to look for secondary scapegoats. The Muslims' failure is due to certain Islamic scholars. But what about Africa? well, it's because of colonialism or inherent 'stupidity'. What about South America? it's because of this or that...

In short, we can conjure up custom excuses for all different societies, or we can look for a common theme among all these peoples and -- in conjunction with historical patterns -- identify the culprit: governance.

As I said, in times of good governance, religion becomes less relevant, so it doesn't matter what some Islamic intellectuals say.

Focus on governance and the rest will follow.

Sometimes it may be better to look for individual reasons as there may not be any common theme.

Or the common theme may be too simplistic.

 

[Hussein]

Mitt Romney Delivers Remarks on U.S. Foreign Policy | Mitt Romney for President
how to be able to go up when countries like USA want to dominate the world?
they decide who should access the tech and who should not.
anyway thank you AIPAC for paying the candidates campaign.

 

[MilSpec]

Sandy


This "influence of a particular view" is in fact the orthodoxy imposed on Muslims by reactionary religious scholars and their political fellow travelers - it is this that is responsible for the decline of Muslims in the fields of sciences and innovation, because the orthodoxy regards sciences and innovation with deep suspicion.
"

Although we share similar view of effect of religious orthodoxy on developmental progress... but even if it created suspicions towards progressive thinking and curbed innovation, religious orthodoxy cannot be the prime reason for collapse of islamic empire alone. We must understand stream of events are not only diverted by certain philosophies but also by individual events.

lets fast forward to a present day scenario .. is religion holding anyone back in creative thinking?

P.S - I enjoyed this discussion .. thanks

 

[Developereo]

Stability may be a necessary condition but not sufficient condition for scientific innovation.

Absolutely!

I never claimed otherwise.

Look at it this way: if we locked up every troublesome mullah in Pakistan, would it fix the electricity problem? would the gang/political wars in Karachi subside? would it fix teacher absenteeism, corruption and tax evasion? would it bring back FDI and fuel an indigenous research industry?

Now, look at the opposite plan of action: if we fixed governance and gave people jobs, education, electricity and rule of law -- when Pakistani people and businesses start to compete on the global stage and leading edge technical competence becomes paramount -- how long do you think these anti-intellectual mullahs would last?

In other words, fixing governance will automatically make these guys irrelevant.

 

[abhishekgoel80]

In the end I found that Islam is the religion that makes more sense and is the most pro-science religion in the world.

I don't question the individual opinions but would definitely point out few things. So I take it as an agreement that no religion is based purely on rationality and evidence.

@ Muse. Kindly substantiate before calling anything rubbish.

On your point in your post about America and it church going population. Then arguing that it is ahead of europe.
1)I would suggest to check the demographics of those involved in research.
fact 1: America has been able to attract talent from around the world and had created best infrastructure for scientific research.
2) The intellectuals in America are already disturbed over the fact that people are taking biblical stories/creationism too seriously(>40%). They were worried about the impact of it on scientific research