Thursday, November 16, 2006 | Science : In the News | print version

Islam and science

by Nature.com

There is a new comment thread on Islam and science posted here:
http://blogs.nature.com/news/blog/2006/11/islam_and_science.html

In many countries with large Muslim populations the pendulum of power is swinging away from secular (but mostly undemocratic) government back to where it was for many centuries: to Islamist regimes, and Islamic law. What does this mean for Muslim scientists and science? For a very long time, Muslim states have scored badly on measures of science and technology. Will things be any better or worse under the new Islamist governments?

Visit Nature's special on Islam and science.
http://www.nature.com/news/specials/islamandscience/index.html

Are you a native Muslim scientist, or part of the Muslim diaspora? What do you think needs to be done to improve the situation for scientists in the Islamic world? Let us know...

Click here to view this growing comment thread

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Thursday, November 16, 2006 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 3 of 3 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #15388 by ashvetz on December 30, 2006 at 9:41 pm

Interesting point: during the Regan-era arms race with the Soviets, there was not nearly as much pressure to teach creationism in public schools as there was/is at other times in history. While there may be other reasons for this, I believe that the need for future engineers spurred the push for science-based education over religious education. While this may not always be the case, the need for advances in warfare technology may help :P

Other Comments by ashvetz

2. Comment #15389 by JohnC on December 30, 2006 at 9:58 pm

Interesting point: during the Regan-era arms race with the Soviets, there was not nearly as much pressure to teach creationism in public schools as there was/is at other times in history.

Sorry, wrong. The Edwards decision was 1987, and the previous 10 years was a period of intense activity. Creationism and biblical literalism has always been the overwhelming majority position of Americans in the South and Mid-West. Political activity around the issue has been determined by prevailing political climate, which in fact was most favourable during the Ronald Ray-Gunz era. Understanding these recent events is crucial to locating the ID movement in its historical context.

I am constantly amazed by the inability of Americans to understand their own history, never mind the rest of the world.

Other Comments by JohnC

3. Comment #15397 by Veronique on December 31, 2006 at 1:18 am

I have glanced through some of the comments made by Islamics on the thread.
I am struck with the idea that Islamic sects and cults are as diverse as those of Christianity. One poster noted that Islamic Malaysia is more influenced by its neighbours than by the absoluteness of the Q'uran.
Groups of people (regardless of religious belief) that have been instructed, nay, impelled to constantly read holy books and pray regularly (5 times/day for Islamics) are being constantly and totally reinforced in that belief system.
Pretty difficult to divorce from such heavy and consistent indocrination.
Science can only develop within societies free enough to think critically and imagine. Religions do not appear to allow such freedom.
Lip service religion is to be, at least, forgiven for allowing freedoms to grow and science to flourish.
Not that I think anyone should pay lip service to anything. It is intellectually dishonest. No wonder I live by myself.
Someone said "the more I see of people, the more I like dogs". Paraphrased I know and I can't recall right now who said it. He was an English playwright and camp.
Thank you all for your postings and humour. I have never felt better since finding this RD site.

Other Comments by Veronique