This is an issue that has long perplexed me...

The Taliban is little more than a ragtag militia. That's why the Americans and other Western troops can kill literally hundreds of them while only losing a few themselves. Their rank-and-file fighters are mostly young men, or even boys, whose only "education" is memorizing a book (the Quran) in a language they don't understand. No mystery there.

However, consider al-Qaeda. The al-Qaeda rank-and-file are not Afghans, they're mostly Arabs, many of them from the oil-rich Gulf countries. And usually quite educated, as far as I know. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri have university degrees. Reportedly, bin Laden's personal bodyguard consisting of several hundred individuals are also well-educated.

The 9/11 hijackers were well-educated. So were, as far as I know, the London bombers.

So how come that people who are educated and in all likelihood know about scientific facts can maintain belief in orthodox Islam? It doesn't click for me. Well-educated Christians are usually liberals/moderates (Teabaggers and Christian fundamentalists are usually not that educated), yet these well-educated men want to turn the clock back to the seventh century, and make the state of the Arabian peninsula back then the state of the world.

Consider what beliefs orthodox Islam requires you to hold. I'm not primaily thinking of scientific errors like creationism and geocentrism. Rather at patently ridiculous beliefs such as that the source of fortune-telling is that Jinns stand on each others' shoulders all the way to Heaven, and listen to what's being said there, and that shooting stars are aimed at the Jinns to stop them from what they're doing. The belief that two angels follow every individual writing down his good deeds and bad deeds. The belief in talking trees and stones. The belief on the eternal brothel for those dying for the faith. I wonder, after say, a trillion years, wont the martyrs get somewhat fed up with fucking virgins?

How do these people manage to hold orthodox Islamic beliefs while having scientific educations? I can't understand this.

The trouble is, they absorbed Islam first. They were brought up in a world believing it to be populated with jinn, angels and the like. Then, seeking to understand the world (well, ok, to get a job) they studied science. However, since nobody had got round to experimenting to determine whether jinn are real they just stuck with studying conventional science.
Once they became competent in science, they compartmentalised. Real live NOMA in one head.
Likewise you can have a professor of thermodynamics who is a young-earth Christian creationist.
Sad, but true.

I cannot speak for Osama and Aiman al Zwahiri, becauise i do not consider them to be Muslims, but i being a progressive Muslim can tell you that most of your information about Islam is flawed. Islam does not believe in geocentrism, nor does it say that jinns stand on each others shoulders all the way to heaven. No Muslim today thinks that earth is the centre of the earth, some Muslims even find evidence in the Quran that supports evolution. I personally believe evolution to be true and frankly i dont find it contradicting the Quran in any way.

aakalim wrote:I cannot speak for Osama and Aiman al Zwahiri, becauise i do not consider them to be Muslims, but i being a progressive Muslim can tell you that most of your information about Islam is flawed. Islam does not believe in geocentrism, nor does it say that jinns stand on each others shoulders all the way to heaven. No Muslim today thinks that earth is the centre of the earth, some Muslims even find evidence in the Quran that supports evolution. I personally believe evolution to be true and frankly i dont find it contradicting the Quran in any way.

Welcome aboard aakalim. I'm sure we'll have many interesting discussions. Meanwhile, I hope you're right and that there are plenty more like you.

It's made easier for them by being told that the Quran contains real scientific knowledge that pre-dates modern efforts, a la The Texas Sharpshooter fallacy.

True, Kaleid, but let's give aakalim a chance. Finding "evidence" that supports evolution is a vast improvement on Yarun HaHa's nonsense that appears to be swallowed wholesale by many Muslims. I'll support accommodationists over deniers any day - while hoping, of course, that they'll go the whole hog one day.

Kaleid wrote:It's made easier for them by being told that the Quran contains real scientific knowledge that pre-dates modern efforts, a la The Texas Sharpshooter fallacy.

Quran is not a book of science, nor does it claims to be.It is, in its own words, a book of guidance for mankind. So any attempt by muslims at claiming that quran contains real scientific facts is flawed.

At best we can say that there are certain things in the quran that agree with the established scientific facts, there may be others that dont. But it does not makes any difference as long as the quran fulfills its primary purpose i.e. to guide mankind towards one true God.

Oh yes, I hope it doesn't seem like I was addressing aakalim specifically, I was just answering the OP. A big problem with debates such as evolution vs creationism is that it's seen by many people as being as polar as atheism vs theism - theists such as aakalim who accept evolution are a welcome addition to the choir

Kaleid wrote:A big problem with debates such as evolution vs creationism is that it's seen by many people as being as polar as atheism vs theism

There's a difference? I welcome aakalim's non-literal view of the Koran but creationists are another matter, whatever book they take literally. (Well, have interpreted for them.)

Welcome Aakalim, I wish more Muslims accepted the Fact of Evolution.

Ciwan wrote:Welcome Aakalim, I wish more Muslims accepted the Fact of Evolution.

I think a lot more than you think do.

The problem is those are the "properly educated" ones. Obviously I'm not not talking madrassas here, but rather those that have had the fortune of being educated in schools with curricula based on those in the western world (but not the US, we know how crappy that could be)....

The majority are way too poor to be able to afford decent education except for religiously sponsored ones, which are frequently run by thugs mainly interested in advancing their own greed-driven agenda masqueraded as "God's will".

Oeditor wrote:

Kaleid wrote:A big problem with debates such as evolution vs creationism is that it's seen by many people as being as polar as atheism vs theism

There's a difference? I welcome aakalim's non-literal view of the Koran but creationists are another matter, whatever book they take literally. (Well, have interpreted for them.)

Sorry, I didn't word that very well. I meant that some people think that if you're a theist then you have to be a creationist, in a sort of either/or way.

Well if you are a creationist, you have to be a theist as creationism, in its very essence, is theistic. Evolution however is not essentially atheistic. There are many “believers” out there who have no problem with evolution, as long as it is theistic evolution.

Most Buddhist and Hindus believe in evolution, same is true for many Muslims, in fact even Catholic Church officially accepts theistic evolution.

Quite right, aakalim. There are countless believers in gods who have no problem with evolution (often, though, because they've been taught nothing about it). I think the OP was asking about people who are really into both religion and science and somehow manage to ignore the contradictions. It isn't just Islam or evolution: the question is really about how anyone claiming to be a scientist can at the same time believe in... well, gods, jinn, angels, miracles, resurrections, flights to heaven, homoeopathy, healing crystals... you name it.

aakalim wrote:

Kaleid wrote:It's made easier for them by being told that the Quran contains real scientific knowledge that pre-dates modern efforts, a la The Texas Sharpshooter fallacy.

Quran is not a book of science, nor does it claims to be.It is, in its own words, a book of guidance for mankind. So any attempt by muslims at claiming that quran contains real scientific facts is flawed.

At best we can say that there are certain things in the quran that agree with the established scientific facts, there may be others that dont.

Hi ya and hello.

What's your view of the things in the Quran that don't agree with science?

John

aakalim wrote:

Kaleid wrote:It's made easier for them by being told that the Quran contains real scientific knowledge that pre-dates modern efforts, a la The Texas Sharpshooter fallacy.

Quran is not a book of science, nor does it claims to be.It is, in its own words, a book of guidance for mankind. So any attempt by muslims at claiming that quran contains real scientific facts is flawed.

At best we can say that there are certain things in the quran that agree with the established scientific facts, there may be others that dont. But it does not makes any difference as long as the quran fulfills its primary purpose i.e. to guide mankind towards one true God.

Then I have two questions:

1. How do you know that the Quran is from Allah?

2. What about Quranic statements that contradict science?

aakalim wrote:
Most Buddhist and Hindus believe in evolution, same is true for many Muslims, in fact even Catholic Church officially accepts theistic evolution.

It does? Could you provide a link to that effect please? The Anglican commune only apolagised to Darwin for "misunderstanding his theory" last year, and that in his homeland after ten years sharing the ten pound note with the queen's face (who is the head of the church of England).

One of the popes said "Darwinian evolutionaryt theory is no longer a mere hypothesis" but that is a long way from admitting historic ignorance in "understanding it".

Don't get me wrong, it'd be great if the Catholic establishment did openly accept evolution...

Oeditor wrote:Quite right, aakalim. There are countless believers in gods who have no problem with evolution (often, though, because they've been taught nothing about it). I think the OP was asking about people who are really into both religion and science and somehow manage to ignore the contradictions. It isn't just Islam or evolution: the question is really about how anyone claiming to be a scientist can at the same time believe in... well, gods, jinn, angels, miracles, resurrections, flights to heaven, homoeopathy, healing crystals... you name it.

I don't think there is necessarily a contradiction between religion and science. Agreed that science cannot prove the existence of God and other metaphysical beings, but neither can it DISPROVE their existence. Science never claims to know anything and every thing that there is in this universe, it has its own limitations.

So i can't see why a scientist cannot believe in God. Would it make him any less of a scientist? I don't think so.

Actually the question should be "how can people with a scientific education be fundamentalists?".
They can believe in Islam like other scientists believe in Christianity.