A Hamza and a Hoodbhoy

[dr.ati]

@Dr.Ati
Went through the posts (my MCB tripped on the ontological post - that usually happens in philosophical matters.)
I am sure people will say as to where were you till now.
Allah kare jor-e-qalam aur zyadah - May Allah(SWT) increase the power of expression.

And now I can also understand that you must be feeling complete consonance with Hamzah - only his knowledge of mono sodium glutamate will be from popular science.

Green --> Greene
Jimmy ---> Jim

Smolin's case is taken as of sour grapes (there is one more similar case).

Looking forward for the exciting journey.

I hope you will be fine insha'Allah brother. As a brother earlier pointed out that the Christians have been dealing with this issue of Atheism since long. We have been lucky in some way. The Galileo vs Church affair which may be taken as the beginning point of "enlightenment" vs Christianity rumble and we Muslims never had such an issue.It only became our issue after the advent of the militant atheism which coupled by the after effects of 9/11 and free media is causing the harm.

I feel that the Christians are more prepared/backed than us on this issue. Currently they have some very fine philosophers debating the atheists. Dr William lane Craig is serving as their quarter back and he is doing his job very well. Then they have Alvin Platinga and John lennox as well. All of them happen to be academic philosophers. Then on the scientific front they have guys like Michael behe and Stephen C Mayers etc.

We are way behind them. Brother Hamza despite his very great efforts and sincerity for which Allah may reward him, does not have a pure scientific or philosophical background and i think that he is the only public speaker about Atheism that we have right now.I think that more and more Muslim academics need to come out in this field.

Brian Greene and Jim Gates are really humble guys and so is Lee smolin. They have kept away from falling to the audacious sort of "Richard Dawkinism". The best man to speak on science and Atheism will be Dr David Berlinski. His book " The Devil's delusion : Atheism and its scientific pretensions" is a must read. He really packs a punch in almost every line of the book. Here is he being interviewed about the book http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyxUwaq00Rc

Insha'Allah brother i intend to write in details (Though i think that MCB got tripped came out only due to Kasar Nafsi) about the ontological argument and its very versions. The main thing which need to be comprehended regarding this specific version of ontological argument i have written is the concept of possible worlds which has to do with the modal logic.Kurt Godel , the maths freak , came up with a very interesting mathematical version of the same argument. Insha'Allah in a week i shall expand my post regarding the ontological argument and write something about its non-modal forms as well.

[Maripat]

I hope you will be fine insha'Allah brother. As a brother earlier pointed out that the Christians have been dealing with this issue of Atheism since long. We have been lucky in some way. The Galileo vs Church affair which may be taken as the beginning point of "enlightenment" vs Christianity rumble and we Muslims never had such an issue.It only became our issue after the advent of the militant atheism which coupled by the after effects of 9/11 and free media is causing the harm.

I feel that the Christians are more prepared/backed than us on this issue. Currently they have some very fine philosophers debating the atheists. Dr William lane Craig is serving as their quarter back and he is doing his job very well. Then they have Alvin Platinga and John lennox as well. All of them happen to be academic philosophers. Then on the scientific front they have guys like Michael behe and Stephen C Mayers etc.

We are way behind them. Brother Hamza despite his very great efforts and sincerity for which Allah may reward him, does not have a pure scientific or philosophical background and i think that he is the only public speaker about Atheism that we have right now.I think that more and more Muslim academics need to come out in this field.

Brian Greene and Jim Gates are really humble guys and so is Lee smolin. They have kept away from falling to the audacious sort of "Richard Dawkinism". The best man to speak on science and Atheism will be Dr David Berlinski. His book " The Devil's delusion : Atheism and its scientific pretensions" is a must read. He really packs a punch in almost every line of the book. Here is he being interviewed about the book http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyxUwaq00Rc

Insha'Allah brother i intend to write in details (Though i think that MCB got tripped came out only due to Kasar Nafsi) about the ontological argument and its very versions. The main thing which need to be comprehended regarding this specific version of ontological argument i have written is the concept of possible worlds which has to do with the modal logic.Kurt Godel , the maths freak , came up with a very interesting mathematical version of the same argument. Insha'Allah in a week i shall expand my post regarding the ontological argument and write something about its non-modal forms as well.

I am charmed again - if that was needed at all.
LoonWatch has been taking care of a very badly felt need and now this initiative to cover the scientific front should bring in good results, IA. May Allah(SWT) accept these efforts, render His help and make it a source of good in this world and Forgiveness in the hereafter. Ameen.
Wassalam

PS: About MCB tripping angle - for some years I have come to the conclusion, rightly or wrongly, that dabbling in philosophical matters does not have returns proportional to effort. Thus I usually try to wiggle my way out of matters involving elements of philosophy. Interestingly I share office with a person who is also a philosopher of science, having published a book also, but I managed to get the deal with him in which we shall not dwell upon matters philosophical.

[Maripat]

aoa,
alhamdulillah.
this is a great victory for our ummah today this blog of yours. sir aap blog likhein advertise mein karunga in sha Allah

p.s do think about writing on express tribune too. wider audience.you can copy paste (after reducing to 800 words) some of your best posts and then in sha Allah see how it advertises itself

I'll still repeat the same assertion - just start doing something. Insha Allah ability will come by practice. Everybody commits mistakes - that is part of life. Help from Allah(SWT) comes at the moment when you are in the field. Jut be moderate in everything and, IA, there should never be a problem.
Wassalam

[Maripat]

Out of the two hour debate these few minutes have been posted separately on YT. This is great boon to those who are hard pressed for time.


Question (PH) : Why did you have to bring in science to make religion seem authentic?
Answer : We'll talk about Islam - not religion. Indeed Islam does not need science to be authenticated. Unfortunately too many people are using science to make religion seem artificial. People of your inclination are foremost in this enterprise.

Q: You brought in M-theory, gravity and Stephen Hawking into discussion but you do not do that for living.
A: If he is not doing that for a living does it mean that he can not use these terms?

PH : I do things pretty close to them.
A : Congratulations - if you need.

PH : You have got these things from popular science books but you do not understand them. You think you understand them. So do not go outside your field of expertize.
A: He may understand some things and he may not understand some other things about these topics. The question is whether his understanding is good or bad for the point that he is making. If he is not supposed to use the popular science knowledge then why is it being written and publicized?

PH: Do not hang important theological issues on popular science knowledge.
A: That is not what is happening. Hamza is only arguing that the science that is being used to throw out Islam can not serve that purpose. The advisable thing will be to stop using science to undermine theology and the onus for that lies on scientists of a particular orientation that includes you.

PH : The only way out is the one pointed out Syed Ahmed Khan, science is one thing, Qur'an is one thing and the Qur'an is to be interpreted in a particular way so that miracles become allegorical.
A : Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (RA) was a human being. He had his own ideas also apart from his faith. He asserted that his graduates will have philosophy in one hand, science in another and they shall have the crown of no god but God on their head. This statement is allegorical, neither the Qur'an nor the miracles, and its implication of this statement are rather clear. When you are in doubt in matters scientific and philosophical then decide them in the light of Qur'an. Thus he believed that it is the Noble Qur'an that is superior and not science. Even if he did get his interpretation of the miracles wrong he knew the way out of it - to submit yourself to the Noble Qur'an. You are insisting on his mistake as a guideline for guidance - it is unjust to the departed soul - may Allah(SWT) show him Mercy.

PH: The difficulty with people like Hamza is that they depend upon half baked knowledge.
A : There is a difference between the people who want to do science or propose and prove and improve theories of science by reading popular science descriptions and the people like Hamza who is using popular science to that level only for which it is designed.

PH : I'll get a blank if I ask him to write down what M-Theory is about.
A : Nearly whole of the physics is based on the principle of least action - suitably interpreted and improvised for different situations. Origins of M-thoery lie in eleven dimensional supergravity theory. Eleven dimensional supergravity theory and hence M-Theory do not have the principle of least action to support it. So even if you ask Edward Witten to write the relevant action principle for M-Theory you shall again get a blank. Will you advice him also to abstain from M-Theory? Perhaps not. In deed it is not an entirely fair demand to ask him to explain scientific theories as a scientist would. It will be certainly fair if the conclusions he is drawing from popular science knowledge are correct or incorrect.

PH : People of diverse religions and different countries can agree upon science but they do not agree upon religion.
A : Not entirely correct assessment. Let us consider the number of people who agree upon a very cogent piece of science - special relativity. We can consider scientists only here and out of them only those who understand it. What will be the number of these agreeing and knowledgeable scientists? Let us assume it is hundred thousand. Now let us consider the number of people in the world who agree on unity of God? It will run into billions.

***

Then there is another few minutes piece which apparently debunks brother Hamza. One wonders where and how in the video?

Noble Qur'an itself asserts that if the people who deny it are truthful then bring even a single verse like this. The man who is asking a question in this video is asserting that the Noble Qur'an has got a new style that was not there earlier and that is all and hence there is no miracle associated with it. Distinction of the Noble Qur'an, he asserts, is the mere introduction of a new literary from which is way of life in literary history of so many languages and there is not extra-ordinary about it. This argument entirely misses the challenge offered by the Noble Qur'an that has stood the test of time for last fourteen centuries.

Argument of this man is strange on two accounts. He knows nothing beyond what Hamza asserts but assumes that Hamza is wrong. Secondly the people in that country have not defended Islam the way they must have. The intellectual space has been left to be occupied by those who hold disparaging attitude towards things Islamic.

[dr.ati]

A very good response to the naive and arrogant arguments of Hoodbhoy. May i publish it on my blog @ Brother Maripat?

[Maripat]

Yes, of course, Dr Sahab.

[dr.ati]

Yes, of course, Dr Sahab.

Jazaka'Allahu Khair brother.

[mh16388]

I'll still repeat the same assertion - just start doing something. Insha Allah ability will come by practice. Everybody commits mistakes - that is part of life. Help from Allah(SWT) when you are in the field. Jut be moderate in everything and, IA, there should never be a problem.
Wassalam

aoa,
i did.
duas expected from you and all those who stumble across this post that the tribune moderators accept the blog titled 'The Respect of Islamic Scholars'.

[Maripat]

aoa,
i did.
duas expected from you and all those who stumble across this post that the tribune moderators accept the blog titled 'The Respect of Islamic Scholars'.

It is unlikely brother that they will accept your blog because you do not serve their purpose. Just create your own blog and give us the link.

@Dr Atif
Dr Sahab kindly check the settings of your blog to incorporate a the blogfeed generator. I included your blog in my feed but nothing is showing yet.

Wassalam

[NNoor]

I have come to the conclusion, rightly or wrongly, that dabbling in philosophical matters does not have returns proportional to effort.

This is very true. I used to spend a lot of time on metaphysics, but in the end, I realized it's something one should only dwell on after he's settled down more important areas in his life. I do plan to get back to it one day, inshallah at the appropriate time. Philosophical proofs are never 100% satisfactory. In alMunqiz min alDalal, Imam alGhazzali mentions this very point, and says something to the effect that the strongest source of faith is spiritual struggle, and that faith is in reality a light that Allah casts into the hearts of those whom He chooses.