2,743
edits
Scientific Miracles in the Quran: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
Another common practice employed by Islamic theologians in making the case for scientific miracles in the Quran is drawing what are best described as pseudo-correlations between the Quran and scientific fact. This is achieved through: the use of decontextualized quotations from scientific publications, scientific and grammatical jargon in a confounding manner, metaphorical interpretations of science, equating the common historical observation of a phenomenon with its modern scientific explanation, as well as inaccurate or incorrect understandings of the relevant scientific fact. | Another common practice employed by Islamic theologians in making the case for scientific miracles in the Quran is drawing what are best described as pseudo-correlations between the Quran and scientific fact. This is achieved through: the use of decontextualized quotations from scientific publications, scientific and grammatical jargon in a confounding manner, metaphorical interpretations of science, equating the common historical observation of a phenomenon with its modern scientific explanation, as well as inaccurate or incorrect understandings of the relevant scientific fact. | ||
In the case of the Quran 'predicting the stabilizing role of mountains', for instance, Islamic theologians suppose that the | In the case of the Quran 'predicting the stabilizing role of mountains', for instance, Islamic theologians suppose that the thickened continental crust or "roots" beneath mountain ranges in some sense stabilize the Earth's crust, whereas modern science does not hold this to be the case. | ||
Critics suggest that where the science correlated to Quranic verses by Islamic theologians has been misunderstood, misapplied, or misrepresented, the case made for the scientific miracle is invalid. | Critics suggest that where the science correlated to Quranic verses by Islamic theologians has been misunderstood, misapplied, or misrepresented, the case made for the scientific miracle is invalid. | ||
| Line 190: | Line 190: | ||
===Mountains as pegs, cast down to stabilize the Earth=== | ===Mountains as pegs, cast down to stabilize the Earth=== | ||
{{Main|The Quran and Mountains}}Many modern Islamic scholars have argued that the Quran's description of mountains as 'pegs' accurately depicts their physical nature and that verses stating that mountains were 'cast | {{Main|The Quran and Mountains}} | ||
The Quran describes mountains as pegs or stakes and as having been cast into the earth lest it shift with its inhabitants. In pre-Islamic poetry (see main article), mountains anchor the earth from tipping over, and the Quranic verses too most straightforwardly seem to refer to mountains stabalizing the earth as a whole. Many modern Islamic scholars have argued that the Quran's description of mountains as 'pegs' accurately depicts their physical nature in terms of the scientifically known phenomenon of isostasy, and that verses stating that mountains were 'cast' into the Earth's surface in order to 'stabilize' refers to some role in preventing earthquakes. Isostasy is the phenomenon where some mountains exist atop a similar accumulation of crust underground. Both the mountain and thickened continental crust beneath them form when tectonic plates collide, with some crust matter being propelled upward (becoming the visible mountain) and, sometimes, a similar quantity of crust matter being propelled downward. | |||
Critics have pointed out that while there is at times an underground accumulation of crust-matter below mountains, scientists have pointed out that this phenomenon does not in any way stabilize the Earth's surface. Indeed, modern science has discovered that mountains (and their underground underbellies) are in fact a direct product of the instability of the Earth's surface, which form when tectonic plates collide and generate destructive earthquakes. | Critics have pointed out that while there is at times an underground accumulation of crust-matter below mountains, scientists have pointed out that this phenomenon does not in any way stabilize the Earth's surface. Indeed, modern science has discovered that mountains (and their underground underbellies) are in fact a direct product of the instability of the Earth's surface, which form when tectonic plates collide and generate destructive earthquakes. | ||
Secondly, critics point out that unlike pegs which are objects placed into something else, mountains caused by plate tectonics are of continuous material as the surrounding crust, albeit of a different shape due to geological processes. Moreover, they do not peg anything to something else since the | Secondly, critics point out that unlike pegs which are objects placed into something else, mountains caused by plate tectonics are of continuous material as the surrounding crust, albeit of a different or contorted shape due to geological processes. Moreover, they do not peg anything to something else since the thickened crust beneath mountain ranges merely protrudes deeper than the surrounding crust into the Earth's mantle, which is molten and not a solid object. | ||
Thirdly, continental crust thickening (sometimes called 'crustal roots' or 'mountain roots', terms which refer to the crust beneath entire mountain ranges rather than individual mountains) does not occur during the formation of other types of mountain, such as karsk mountains, plateau mountains, fault-block mountains, and lava dome mountains. | |||
Fourthly, critics also point out that there is no sense to the idea that mountains have been 'cast' into the Earth as 'pegs', for mountains are a byproduct of a larger process (usually, plate tectonics). Indeed, critics note that mountains continue to rise and erode away to this day, unlike the Quranic description of a one off event during the first four days of creation. In [[Cosmology|Islamic cosmology]], the Earth is just the top-most of seven terrestrial disks, which in one tradition are in turn stacked atop the back of [[The Islamic Whale|a giant whale]]. In one version of this tradition, the instability of the non-stationary whale causes the earth to be unstable, which must then be fastened to the back of the whale using mountain-pegs. | |||
A number of other criticisms are set out in the main article. | |||
{{Quote|{{quran|16|15}}|And He has cast into the earth firmly set mountains, lest it shift with you, and [made] rivers and roads, that you may be guided,}} | {{Quote|{{quran|16|15}}|And He has cast into the earth firmly set mountains, lest it shift with you, and [made] rivers and roads, that you may be guided,}} | ||
{{Quote|{{quran-range|78|6|7}}|Have We not made the earth a resting place And the mountains as stakes?}} | {{Quote|{{quran-range|78|6|7}}|Have We not made the earth a resting place And the mountains as stakes?}} | ||
| Line 231: | Line 237: | ||
Many modern Islamic scholars, all drawing on the work of Saudi-financed researcher and lecturer at King Abdulaziz University Dr. Keith Moore, have argued that the {{Quran|96|16}}'s mention of a 'lying, sinful forelock' contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the area of the brain that is employed in the activity of lying, namely, it is said, the prefrontal cortex (which lies below one's forelock). Historians and linguists, by contrast, do not view this passage in the Quran as making any pretensions about predicting modern science. They view the phrase 'lying, sinful forelock' as a simple metaphorical and metonymic reference to the individual described in the preceding verse who is being dragged by his forelock rather than a reference to the portion of the brain it resides on top of - the intent of this usage, they suggest, is not that the forelock is literally lying (which is evidently impossible) but simple to say that the person, of whom this forelock is a part, is lying. Critics have also pointed out that there is plenty of modern research utilizing fMRI technology which militates against the idea that lying takes place in the pre-frontal cortex, including the work of Professor Jia-Hong Gao of Peking University (trained at Yale and MIT), Professor Scott H. Faro, Professor Frank A. Kozel (trained at Yale), Professor Daniel D. Langleben of the University of Pennsylvania, and Professor Stephen M. Kosslyn of Harvard University (trained at Stanford). This research shows that the portion of the brain responsible for lying may in fact be the anterior cingulate gyrus, which lies in the medial portion of the brain in frontal-parietal area and not beneath the forelock.{{Quote|{{quran-range|96|15|16}}|Nay! If not he desists, surely We will drag him by the forelock, A forelock lying, sinful.}} | Many modern Islamic scholars, all drawing on the work of Saudi-financed researcher and lecturer at King Abdulaziz University Dr. Keith Moore, have argued that the {{Quran|96|16}}'s mention of a 'lying, sinful forelock' contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the area of the brain that is employed in the activity of lying, namely, it is said, the prefrontal cortex (which lies below one's forelock). Historians and linguists, by contrast, do not view this passage in the Quran as making any pretensions about predicting modern science. They view the phrase 'lying, sinful forelock' as a simple metaphorical and metonymic reference to the individual described in the preceding verse who is being dragged by his forelock rather than a reference to the portion of the brain it resides on top of - the intent of this usage, they suggest, is not that the forelock is literally lying (which is evidently impossible) but simple to say that the person, of whom this forelock is a part, is lying. Critics have also pointed out that there is plenty of modern research utilizing fMRI technology which militates against the idea that lying takes place in the pre-frontal cortex, including the work of Professor Jia-Hong Gao of Peking University (trained at Yale and MIT), Professor Scott H. Faro, Professor Frank A. Kozel (trained at Yale), Professor Daniel D. Langleben of the University of Pennsylvania, and Professor Stephen M. Kosslyn of Harvard University (trained at Stanford). This research shows that the portion of the brain responsible for lying may in fact be the anterior cingulate gyrus, which lies in the medial portion of the brain in frontal-parietal area and not beneath the forelock.{{Quote|{{quran-range|96|15|16}}|Nay! If not he desists, surely We will drag him by the forelock, A forelock lying, sinful.}} | ||
===Fresh water-salt water barriers=== | ===Fresh water-salt water barriers=== | ||
Many modern Islamic scholars argue that {{Quran|25|53}} contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the 'separation' of fresh and salt water in estuaries, where fresh water rivers meet the salty ocean. Critics and historians argue that this verse is merely stating what any person viewing the convergence of a river and ocean with their unaided eye would observe - namely, that the two bodies of water maintain distinct coloration. The additional proposition made in the verse regarding the existence of some sort of barrier that causes the maintenance of this difference in coloration, they continue, is simply what a premodern person inclined to believe in metaphysical entities might hypothesize as the cause. Critics point out that there is, in fact, no such 'barrier' present in estuaries and that the persistent distinction between the two bodies of water is due a difference in the density of fresh and salt water - even this distinction, however, can be compromised when other factors, such as wind and stronger tidal forces, are at play which cause the bodies of water to mix with one another at a greater rate. | Many modern Islamic scholars argue that {{Quran|25|53}} contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the 'separation' of fresh and salt water in estuaries, where fresh water rivers meet the salty ocean. Critics and historians argue that this verse is merely stating what any person viewing the convergence of a river and ocean with their unaided eye would observe - namely, that the two bodies of water maintain distinct coloration. The additional proposition made in the verse regarding the existence of some sort of barrier that causes the maintenance of this difference in coloration, they continue, is simply what a premodern person inclined to believe in metaphysical entities might hypothesize as the cause. Critics point out that there is, in fact, no such 'barrier' present in estuaries and that the persistent distinction between the two bodies of water is due a difference in the density of fresh and salt water - even this distinction, however, can be compromised when other factors, such as wind and stronger tidal forces, are at play which cause the bodies of water to mix with one another at a greater rate. | ||
In any case, the Quran appears to be referring to two mythological seas, one salty and one of fresh water. | |||
{{Quote|{{quran|25|53}}|And it is He who has released [simultaneously] the two seas, one fresh and sweet and one salty and bitter, and He placed between them a barrier and prohibiting partition.}} | {{Quote|{{quran|25|53}}|And it is He who has released [simultaneously] the two seas, one fresh and sweet and one salty and bitter, and He placed between them a barrier and prohibiting partition.}} | ||
{{Quote|{{quran|27|61}}|Is He [not best] who made the earth a stable ground and placed within it rivers and made for it firmly set mountains and placed between the two seas a barrier? Is there a deity with Allah? [No], but most of them do not know.}} | |||
{{Quote|{{Quran-range|55|19|22}}|He released the two seas, meeting [side by side]; Between them is a barrier [so] neither of them transgresses. So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny? From both of them emerge pearl and coral.}} | {{Quote|{{Quran-range|55|19|22}}|He released the two seas, meeting [side by side]; Between them is a barrier [so] neither of them transgresses. So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny? From both of them emerge pearl and coral.}} | ||
Another reference to "the two seas" (bahrayn) is found in the story of Moses and his servant. | Another reference to "the two seas" (bahrayn) is found in the story of Moses and his servant. | ||