[SolarCross]

[Drlee]

Holy SHIT. The fucking wheels have come off and the bullshit is flying:

The first attempts at science were done by Muslims, if I recall correctly.

You do not recall correctly. Science has been "done" since the beginning of time. The Egyptians by 3500 BC (4100 years before Islam existed) were practicing astronomy, Medicine, mathamatics..... Really. WTF!

I am NEVER contributing a dime to a university again.

The OXY in his usual horseshit throwing said this nonsense:

I wrote an entire essay here detailing both Islamic influences in modern Western philosophy and Islamic philosophical ideas found in Western philosophy in my discussion with VS. I'm not going to repost it. DrLee and SolarCross were present throughout the debate so they're just either willfully ignorant or haven't read the debate at all.

You can post that you wear pink underwear but that does not make you right. (And given where you live, might get you hung but then I digress.)

Oxy said: All translated Greek texts that came to Europe were Islamic commentaries. This isn't the only proof but it's the most simple ones.

And it is untrue. Of course it is untrue. Perhaps Oxy does not know what a commentary is. Or perhaps he forget that early Christians....oh never mind.

And, as usual, completely wrong. FFS man. We have extant mosaics of Odysseus from 200 years before Islam existed.

And they probably helped preserve a lot of Greco-Roman works during the Dark Ages.

There is no doubt about scholarship in Islamic countries during the dark ages. But is this because of Islam or despite it?

This thread is becoming really shallow.

[foxdemon]

@Oxymandias Certainly the Mongolian invasion correlated with the closing of the gates of reason, and surely had an impact on the self confidence of the Islamic civilization of the time. But I think there where internal factors leading up to that.

I am not very familiar with that era but it seems there was a struggle between reason and obedience in Islamic thought. The former favouring the old scholarship tradition and the later favouring the interests of elites.

To what extent, do you think, in the contemporary West similar to the 13th century Islamic world? There is a growing movement for obedience on both left and right, primarily advancing the interests of plutocrats retention of power (eg: Antifa).

Do you think the West is about to close the gates of reason if an external shock leads them to lose confidence?

[Pants-of-dog]

You do not recall correctly. Science has been "done" since the beginning of time. The Egyptians by 3500 BC (4100 years before Islam existed) were practicing astronomy, Medicine, mathamatics..... Really. WTF!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_al-Haytham

Ibn al-Haytham was the first person in history to say that a hypothesis needed to be verifed through experiments.

While Aristotle and Epicurus both argued for a natural philosophy based on empirical observations, neither thought that verification of their ideas was a thing.

Also, please identify clearly whose posts you are quoting. The way you formatted your post makes it unclear which claims were mine and which belong to @Oxymandias. Thanks.

[Oxymandias]

@Drlee

1. Then prove to me that I’m wrong. Saying I’m wrong doesn’t make you right. Unless you have a proper rebuttal you might as well not speak at all.

2. I should’ve probably specified “to the general public of Europe”. Most Christian translated Greek texts were kept by Churches and were traded between Churches. Everyone else was closed off.

3. How are mosaics related to this? Furthermore, if it’s 200 years before Islam existed it would probably be in Late Antiquity during the Late Roman Empire so of course such mosaics would exist. I’m don’t know what you’re arguing here.

4. Islamic scientists have all cited Islam as a motivation for their works. Islamic philosophers primarily built from Islamic theology. Caliphs jumpstarted the Islamic Golden Age in the first place by paying Islamic polymaths the same amount of money as professional athlete and building the House of Wisdom all because they thought Islam encouraged the acquisition of knowledge. Hell, an entire Islamic sect was based upon rationalism and empiricism and it is from this sect that a majority of Islamic science and philosophy came from so yes, it was in part due to Islam.

Thinking religion wasn’t a motivator at all is shallow and ignores what Islamic scientists and philosophers had to say about the matter themselves. It ignores the philosophies of Golden Age Muslims by disconnecting them from religion without understanding that such philosophies arose from the applications of theological understanding and dismisses the clearly expressed motivations of Islamic scientists as “unknown”.

Your argument is shallow and you should feel shallow.

[Oxymandias]

@foxdemon

There were other reasons outside of philosophy that lead to the gates of reason closing (I know there’s an Arabic term for it, it’s just lost on me right now) such as the increasing lack of control the Abbasids had on their territories and the emergence of military strongmen controlling them, the conquest of its territories by foreigners which increased xenophobia and motivated extremism, and the destruction of their civilization which led to the thought that their destruction was an act of Allah as a punishment all contributed to a lack of scientific achievements afterward.

Based on this, the situation of the West is completely different. The powers of the Middle East aren’t united and powerful enough to directly take parts of Europe I.e. Crusade nor is Europe fractured and weak enough to let that happen. Furthermore, the situation of the West depends on where you’re looking at. The situation of America is 100% different from Europe.

[annatar1914]

@Oxymandias

I have been following this debate as it has meandered from the question of the original post (''were the Crusades justified''?) to discussions on root causes, and so I feel compelled to post again on this issue. You have been an adroit defender of the ''Islamic World'' if we may call it that, but I'd like to run with some comments from what you've posted. You said;

There were other reasons outside of philosophy that lead to the gates of reason closing (I know there’s an Arabic term for it, it’s just lost on me right now) such as the increasing lack of control the Abbasids had on their territories and the emergence of military strongmen controlling them, the conquest of its territories by foreigners which increased xenophobia and motivated extremism, and the destruction of their civilization which led to the thought that their destruction was an act of Allah as a punishment all contributed to a lack of scientific achievements afterward.

I think as per Spengler that every civilization has it's own ''Science'', which is a reflection of the way in which that civilization looks at reality more than it is a universal or absolute in it's own right, as a fair reading of Thomas Kuhn about the structure of scientific revolutions can attest to. Personally, I feel that the Islamic world did as well as can be expected in the scientific realm in comparison with the West, but the end game of the West's seeming dominance in science and technology is not the last word in the affair.

Based on this, the situation of the West is completely different. The powers of the Middle East aren’t united and powerful enough to directly take parts of Europe I.e. Crusade nor is Europe fractured and weak enough to let that happen. Furthermore, the situation of the West depends on where you’re looking at. The situation of America is 100% different from Europe.

I believe that there is in one respect a tinge of hysteria mingled with opportunism with European fears of Islamic immigration and so forth, a moment of crisis that is somewhat manufactured to provoke a certain reaction, which is already happening. To borrow again from Spengler, the shared common ''Magian'' Cosmos of the Orthodox Christian, the Orthodox Jew, the Shia Muslim, and the Zoroasterian is under attack like never before, and everyone is becoming Westernized against our will. For all our differences, you and I have more in common in some respects than we care to admit just yet.

[Rich]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_al-Haytham

Ibn al-Haytham was the first person in history to say that a hypothesis needed to be verifed through experiments.

Even the article you quote doesn't claim that.

The simple fact is that the Muslims conquered most of the great civilizational centres, Egypt, Byzantium, Babylon, Persia, Carthage, Damascus, Allepo and Afghanistan and turned them into shitholes. For many many centuries Infidels both closet and open carried on producing great culture, despite the Muslim parasites in power.

[Pants-of-dog]

From my previous link:

Ibn al-Haytham was the first to explain that vision occurs when light bounces on an object and then is directed to one's eyes.[22] He was also an early proponent of the concept that a hypothesis must be proved by experiments based on confirmable procedures or mathematical evidence—hence understanding the scientific method five centuries before Renaissance scientists.[23][24][25][26][27][28]

[Rich]

An early proponent != the first person in history.

Edit. != is the standard computing term for not equal.

[SolarCross]

Pagan Greek science doesn't become "Islamic" philosophy just by translating it into Arabic. Stolen glory.

[Pants-of-dog]

If you would like to mention someone who came up with the idea (of verifying hypotheses through experiments) before Ibn al-Haytham, be my guest.

[Drlee]

This entire thread borders on the preposterous and I am sorry I got involved.

As Rich pointed out...Defending what was is as absurd as condemning the present because of the past.

If territories occupied by Islam were once a place of learning and enlightenment then they sure blew that. More likely Rich's explanation holds true. These nations are certainly not places of enlightenment today.

Now I am sure someone will post something idiotic like "Oh yea! Christians used to burn witches". Doesn't matter. Did Islam invent scientific method?

No. Clearly not. Real science including experiment, observation and mathematical confirmation was practiced by the ancient Egyptians among others. The Medical Papyri prove that conclusively. So let's hear no more about "Islam" inventing scientific method. '

Careful about putting too much trust on absolute statements on Wiki, POD. The one you quoted was pretty lame on the face of it. If you had even read the article you would see that al-Haytham repeated Ptolomy's experiments done many centuries before. Hyperbole is the death of discourse.

We don't know who invented scientific method. Probably lots of people in lots of places. It was most certainly used, not used, partially used, unnecessary to a real discovery, all of that.

Ibn al-Haytham was a marvelous man. Probably one of the great minds of all times. Did this have anything to do with Islam? I don't know. Did it matter that Einstein was a Jew, Newton a Christian and Hawking an atheist. I think not so much. They were all blessed to live in a place and time where their ideas were allowed to flourish. There is nothing unique about this at all.

If you would like to mention someone who came up with the idea (of verifying hypotheses through experiments) before Ibn al-Haytham, be my guest.

Claudius Ptolemy.

Almost every Astronomer who ever tried to explain the movements of heavenly objects mathematically relied on observation. Figure out the math and then watch to see if it works.

62 A.D. Hero of Alexandria

pharaoh Psamtik, Genetic linguistics through the forbidden experiment. 600 BC.

AD 300, Ge Hong Experimented and recorded his experiments with gunpowder.

[Pants-of-dog]

Did Islam invent scientific method?

No. Clearly not. Real science including experiment, observation and mathematical confirmation was practiced by the ancient Egyptians among others. The Medical Papyri prove that conclusively. So let's hear no more about "Islam" inventing scientific method. '

Please provide evidence for your claims. Thank you.

Also, please cite whose posts you are quoting so that there is no confusion as to whom you are replying. Thanks.

[Drlee]

Please provide evidence for your claims. Thank you.

Bite me. If you wish to disprove them go right ahead.

Helpful hint: You are going to have to do better than one line, taken out of context, disputed in the same context; a Wiki article.

[Pants-of-dog]

No, I have provided enough evidence to support my claim.

I am not here to do your work for you.

[Drlee]

You have supported nothing. You took one quote out of context, making a claim disputed in the same article.

If you are truly interested in the truth then do your own research. I will not fall for your typical smug disdain for what others post.

[Pants-of-dog]

If you wish to make unsupported claims, go ahead.

There is no reason for you to also be rude to me.

[Oxymandias]

@annatar1914

I think as per Spengler that every civilization has it's own ''Science'', which is a reflection of the way in which that civilization looks at reality more than it is a universal or absolute in it's own right, as a fair reading of Thomas Kuhn about the structure of scientific revolutions can attest to. Personally, I feel that the Islamic world did as well as can be expected in the scientific realm in comparison with the West, but the end game of the West's seeming dominance in science and technology is not the last word in the affair.

Why do you think so? What about the Greater Middle East makes it incapable of going beyond the scientific progress it has made? I don't think you quite realize how prosperous the ME was at the time.

I believe that there is in one respect a tinge of hysteria mingled with opportunism with European fears of Islamic immigration and so forth, a moment of crisis that is somewhat manufactured to provoke a certain reaction, which is already happening. To borrow again from Spengler, the shared common ''Magian'' Cosmos of the Orthodox Christian, the Orthodox Jew, the Shia Muslim, and the Zoroasterian is under attack like never before, and everyone is becoming Westernized against our will. For all our differences, you and I have more in common in some respects than we care to admit just yet.

Actually I agree. Just get more knowledgeable about Islam and we'll get along just fine.

@Drlee

This entire thread borders on the preposterous and I am sorry I got involved.

I also apologize

As Rich pointed out...Defending what was is as absurd as condemning the present because of the past.

You're the first person I have ever seen to take Rich seriously. He doesn't even cite where he gets his shit information, he just rants about stuff he doesn't understand.

If territories occupied by Islam were once a place of learning and enlightenment then they sure blew that. More likely Rich's explanation holds true. These nations are certainly not places of enlightenment today.

I already discussed this with VS. Islam isn't responsible for the decline of those places of learning, they were in steep decline before Islam even existed (i.e. Alexandria, North Africa, most of the Byzantine Empire actually). They aren't nations of enlightenment today not because of Islam but because of several external factors such as the Mongols and the Crusades.

Now I am sure someone will post something idiotic like "Oh yea! Christians used to burn witches". Doesn't matter. Did Islam invent scientific method?

Not Islam but Islamic philosophers.

No. Clearly not. Real science including experiment, observation and mathematical confirmation was practiced by the ancient Egyptians among others. The Medical Papyri prove that conclusively. So let's hear no more about "Islam" inventing scientific method. '

You clearly don't know what the scientific method is if you think that trial and error "experiments" are an indication of the scientific method. There was no method to Egyptian science, only trial and error.

you would see that al-Haytham repeated Ptolomy's experiments done many centuries before. Hyperbole is the death of discourse.

1. He didn't only repeat Ptolomy's experiments. You're just cherry picking here. Confirmation bias is a bitch isn't it?

2. He repeated Ptolomy's experiments using the scientific method. His goal was to examine the validity of Ptolomy's results and verify them.

Ibn al-Haytham was a marvelous man. Probably one of the great minds of all times. Did this have anything to do with Islam? I don't know.

Maybe you should fucking read then:

Alhazen was a Muslim; it is not certain to which school of Islam he belonged. As a Sunni, he may have been either a follower of the Ash'ari school,[114] or a follower of the Mu'tazili school.[115] Sabra (1978) even suggested he might have been an adherent of Shia Islam.[116][need quotation to verify]

Alhazen wrote a work on Islamic theology in which he discussed prophethood and developed a system of philosophical criteria to discern its false claimants in his time.[117] He also wrote a treatise entitled Finding the Direction of Qibla by Calculation in which he discussed finding the Qibla, where prayers (salat) are directed towards, mathematically.[118]

There are occasional references to theology or religious sentiment in his technical works, e.g. in Doubts Concerning Ptolemy:

Truth is sought for its own sake ... Finding the truth is difficult, and the road to it is rough. For the truths are plunged in obscurity. ... God, however, has not preserved the scientist from error and has not safeguarded science from shortcomings and faults. If this had been the case, scientists would not have disagreed upon any point of science...[119]

In The Winding Motion:

From the statements made by the noble Shaykh, it is clear that he believes in Ptolemy's words in everything he says, without relying on a demonstration or calling on a proof, but by pure imitation (taqlid); that is how experts in the prophetic tradition have faith in Prophets, may the blessing of God be upon them. But it is not the way that mathematicians have faith in specialists in the demonstrative sciences.[120]

Regarding the relation of objective truth and God:

I constantly sought knowledge and truth, and it became my belief that for gaining access to the effulgence and closeness to God, there is no better way than that of searching for truth and knowledge.[121]

Like I said, you should fucking read. You use your ignorance as a way to prove that Islam didn't have an effect on the development of sciences when those scientists clearly stated the influence of Islam on their scientific careers.

[annatar1914]

@Oxymandias

You said in reply to my comment about the Greater Middle East and it going as far as could be expected scientifically and technologically that;

Why do you think so? What about the Greater Middle East makes it incapable of going beyond the scientific progress it has made? I don't think you quite realize how prosperous the ME was at the time.

It is perhaps a reflection of my own bias, but I think Middle Easterners were too smart to take science and technology down the road that the West took exactly, and not having the cultural hallmarks to take the directions the West took, did not have an actual ''failure'' as a civilization. To me it's not a bad thing, as I do not believe that this western style science and technology is sustainable. Prosperity I believe is more a function of social stability than science/technological progress in my opinion.

Actually I agree. Just get more knowledgeable about Islam and we'll get along just fine.

Well, there's more to it than ''knowledge'', but I'll take that agreement as a start of better dialogue.