چکیده:
The idea of Islamic Science has been around for at least three decades, and it has generated a lot of controversy. Some people deny that chis idea makes any sense. They argue that science is an objective and universal enterprise, and it docs not depend on any creed or ideology. We believe that this is a naive interpretation of scientific activity and that 'Islamic Science.' or for that matter, 'religious science,' has relevance at two levels: the theoretical level and the practical level. At the theoretical level. the philosophical and ideological presuppositions of the scientist are very effective in his or her theory-making or choice of theories. As for the practical orientation of science, the cultural traditions of the scientist make a difference. Thus, 'Islamic science' ascertains the relevance of scientific activities to Islamic worldview, which has implications for both the theoretical and the practical aspects of science.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Scientific theories are made under the influence of scientists' metaphysical outlook about the nature of physical reality, and this in tum has frequently been under the influence of philosophical or religious commitments.
" In comparison, secular science neglects God, limits existence to the material world alone, denies any purpose for the universe and is negligent about values.
we believe that the main difference between Islamic science and secular science shows up in the following areas: Metaphysical presuppositions of science can often be rooted in religious world views.
7 Of course, the many-world hypothesis is itself nonverifiable as Jastrow has put it elegantly: Some scientists suggest, in an effort to avoid a theistic or teleological implication in their findings, that there must be an infinite number of universes, representing all possible combinations of basic forces and conditions, and that our universe is one of an infinitely small fraction, in this great plentitude of universes, in which life exists.
have neglected is the fact that the absence of a temporal beginning for the universe does not necessarily imply the selfsufficiency of the universe and its independence from God. Example 4 Darwin's theory of evolution claimed that all living things have evolved by natural processes from preexisting forms.
In response to this view we have the following comments: If scientific books were reflecting purely scientific findings, not being colored by metaphysical commitments and inclinations of scientists, we could in some sense consider science free from worldviews, and attribute the words 'religious' or 'secular' to scientists rather than sciences.