Call to choose between Islam, science arrogant
Dr Jeffrey Abu HassanPublished: Nov 23, 2005 8:02 AM | Updated: Jan 29, 2008 10:21 AM
The call by Lacrema in his letter Islam vs science: Choose your side please to choose either religion or science is as absurd as it is childish.
It reflects a lack of understanding of the philosophical foundations of modern science as outlined in my previous letter Science nothing more than a systematic study of the material world.
It typifies the naivet of those - often with little or no scientific background - who are mesmerised by the achievements of modern science which are undoubtedly remarkable and beneficial to mankind.
Scientism embraces a positivist materialist vision of reality that denies a transcendent reality and the cult of the self-sufficiency of man.
However, with the discrediting of modernism's grand narratives of which includes scientism, there is, today, a sober evaluation on the limitations of modern science, a questioning of its epistemological premises and a concern over technology unrestrained by ethics and spirituality such that the non-sustainability of the planet is a real, grave possibility.
Not that religion must dictate science, but the principle of the non-overlapping magisterium between the two is an outdated dictum. Asking one to choose between science and religion reflects the silly arrogance of latter-day dogmatists of scientism, not science.
It reflects a lack of understanding of the philosophical foundations of modern science as outlined in my previous letter Science nothing more than a systematic study of the material world.
It typifies the naivet of those - often with little or no scientific background - who are mesmerised by the achievements of modern science which are undoubtedly remarkable and beneficial to mankind.
Scientism embraces a positivist materialist vision of reality that denies a transcendent reality and the cult of the self-sufficiency of man.
However, with the discrediting of modernism's grand narratives of which includes scientism, there is, today, a sober evaluation on the limitations of modern science, a questioning of its epistemological premises and a concern over technology unrestrained by ethics and spirituality such that the non-sustainability of the planet is a real, grave possibility.
Not that religion must dictate science, but the principle of the non-overlapping magisterium between the two is an outdated dictum. Asking one to choose between science and religion reflects the silly arrogance of latter-day dogmatists of scientism, not science.
View Comments0

