Lost In The Desert: When Science Investigates Religion

“Being not knowing something doesn’t mean that something doesn’t exist” (Arab Proverb)

Lost in the dessert is when science investigates religion. An ordinary student like me often get confused when encountering some research findings which explain the relation between science and religion. Long before philosophy of positivism claimed that only through -what was to become known as- the scientific method the truth can be revealed, the disputable question between scientific and religious claim of truth had been aroused among people of knowledge. Since ancient Greek period, the philosophers had many disagreements in their effort in seeking the truth. Between science and religion there emerges the demarcation line that separated them. As if both are totally different source creating different model to view the world.

Quite often we find them in a binary position. Derived from a total demarcation of science and religion, there comes a conflicting relation between reason and belief, metaphysic and physic, even a theologian and a scientist, and so on. This is consequently inherited through the history of philosophy of science. As a student who studies sociology, I can feel the sense of conflicting and contradicting view among both. Particularly when relating to the history of sociology. Auguste Comte, known as the Father of Positivism, declared that there comes a time when he would give birth of a new science that would set society into order. He called it social physic, later became known as sociology. The birth of sociology is of through three steps; theology, metaphysics, and positivistic. The latest one is the new basic philosophical foundation of all science to be categorized as ‘scientific’. Later we found never even one single research in politics, psychology, literature, economy, and so forth could be called ‘scientific’ without using scientific methods defined by positivistic philosophy.

As you might have known that what we mean by ‘scientific’ is when every single object is empirically verifiable and logically undeniable. It should also be observable through human senses. We then depend on our sense to gain scientific knowledge. At this point, I would like to start to talk about the role religion can play in the realm of science. The main question I propose is where exactly is the role of religion in scientific inquiry?

As a believer who is at the same time believes in a certain scientific method, I cannot deny that there are many things that difficult to answer, mostly the things which have something to do with metaphysics. Let us mention myths, angels, ghost, God, the hereafter, and so on. When it comes to metaphysical questions, very often religion has at least ‘clues’ for answers. Meanwhile science doesn’t have one. Science in this case can only give support to ‘the divine hypotheses’ by adding at some evidences.  The explanation about ghost or even God for example, can be relatively easily found from the scriptural sources, but not that in skeptical historical writings. It seems best to go to both of them in dealing with metaphysics of course, but again it is never going to be easy. Moreover for those who almost always rely only their scholarly investigation on the western philosophy which is full of doubt and skepticism.

After that brief and -I believe- uncompleted explanation, I will tell you a story of the lack of relation between science and religion. This story is about historical inquiry to find the origin of one of the most powerful religion in the world, Islam. This story has been very well documented in a form of semi-documentary movie produced by Channel4 under the title; “Islam: The Untold Story”.

In one occasion, a historian Tom Holland examined one of the biggest religion born in the 7^th century in the land of Arab called Islam. The scientific investigation is aimed to reveal the origin of Islam which until now engenders the refutation among many historians. The movie later became controversial since was guided by a skeptic. Tom Holland is considered himself as a skeptical historian who also doesn’t believe in God. I followed every single minute of his investigation to Islam from which I found such a hard effort to find an objective truth. I appreciate Tom’s effort since he enriched my perspective in seeing my own religion.

Over the course of the investigation, Tom not only did travel to many countries in the Middle East, but had some deep interview with leading scholars in Islamic studies such as Patricia Corn, Professor at Princeton, Fred Donner, Professor at Chicago, Gerald Hawting, Professor at SOAS, and Prof. Syed Hossein Nasr, the greatest modern scholar of Islam. The research began with a containing doubt of historical sources explaining to the origin of Islam. Due to the first historical book concerning with the life of the Prophet (pbuh) is written around 200 years after the death of The Prophet (pbuh), historians have no other options but to rely on the oral history. For positivistic point of view oral history without any support of empirical evidences means the lack of validity.

Even from religious sources, there are many different story tell us about this religion. Comparative study through scriptural sources cannot reveal clearly when and where exactly the religion of Islam began to appear. The story of Abraham (pbuh) and his children; Ishaq (pbuh) and Ismael (pbuh) for example, told in many versions. The conflict between three monotheistic religions; Jew, Christianity, and Islam is puzzled and too complex to decipher. Tom Holland never gave up his life in the name of the truth.

One of my favorite parts of the movie is when Tom had an interview session with Prof. Nasr. He was asking “is it possible for a historian who doesn’t believe in God like me, to find the truth of the origin of Islam through historical inquiry?” In less than one second, Prof. Nasr replied “no, you’re not”. In the last part of the movie, Tom Holland symbolically came into the middle of the dessert, standing alone looking around and found nothing. He said that religion in one sense can only be felt without reasoning and sometimes for those who are believers, to understand what religion is they don’t need eyes to see, hands to hold, and feet to walk. The very famous Arabic proverb quoted by Prof. Nasr on that interview was that “being not knowing something, doesn’t mean that something doesn’t exist”.

The main kasus of western philosophy shaping the structure of knowledge to what was called ‘scientific knowledge’ lies on its own rationality. Through its rationality, science disrupt in only empirical. This view called empiricism. In the philosophy of empiricism, senses are the only judge of a true knowledge. This is something that for centuries has demarcated the west from the east.

Sumber aciknadzirah.blogspot.com

Berlangganan Informasi Terbaru: