Re: Existence of life
Peace Theorist
First of all this is not a debate for me (which is an argument) … I do not want to win, but I want clear understanding between us if you want to continue in this conversation. Please try to understand what I am saying before commenting.
“If science relied on ancient texts then it would not be science” - what warranted this statement?
“What is the point of this process if you are not going to believe the results?” - This shows that you do not understand what my stance is at all …
Now your thought experiment is totally flawed and here is why …
a) Replace the word God with boogeyman - Okay, but by doing that you are also causing a huge issue … and that is in the understanding of the concept of God as a whole … a boogeyman has an already established folkloric definition and some of them are contradictory and none of them say that he is God the Creator of the Universe. Not only is the God concept stating in Islam that He is Unseen, but it also states that “no space confines Him” - If the boogeyman can be under the bed - for a surety it is wrong to infer that on to the concept of God. Replacing a name has ramifications in terms of their understood Attributes … we can’t just replace a name and expect to use analogy in one case to disprove the other.
b) Now in your thought experiment - you referred to “a book” again that is not like “The Qur’an” - the latter is proven to be a scripture that came uttered from the lips of an unlettered and uneducated person … yet it contains wisdoms beyond the biggest intellects of his time and stands unchallenged today, despite the spurious claims …
c) Furthermore, the experiment to be correct has to be linking the book to the belief - i.e. we believe that the Qur’an is from Deity … so in your experiment - the boy needs to be sure that the book he has - comes from the boogeyman and would be able to present reasons why he is sure it is authored by the boogeyman.
Lastly, the only avenue that science can reveal is whether or not it can confirm a “sighting of God” - and we know that we will never be able to see God. It is hence a pointless experiment to do … If science somehow shows “God” - then Muslims are obliged to reject that notion, not that we reject science see something or not, but to reject that what is being seen is God or not … because if that entity whatever it is can be seen yet does marvelous and amazing unhumanly unimaginable things - it will still be contained within the 6 directions and have tangible form and hence inferior to its surroundings and hence we will have to conclude that entity claimant for God is a false claim … a liar - a Dajjal - nothing can contain God - this is an Islamic axiom.
The way to fathom some semblance of God is not rooted in scientific experimentation … Rather it is rooted in inductive argumentation from a philosophical point of view and it is rooted in faith … but it is reasoned faith … it is unlike superstition which is really what kprasad is saying when he refers to “faith” … for him superstition and faith are the same thing. For me however and according to Islam - superstition is forbidden and a form of disbelief.
Faith and Superstition are fundamentally different but many cannot see that who argue from the scientific point of view. For example - astrology is a form of superstition because those who believe in it ascribe power to an arrangement of natural bodies to influence the workings in people’s lives … This is not because it cannot be scientifically proven or not, but because from an abstract point of view - things of lesser intelligence cannot govern the workings of higher intelligence to the extent of it being outside their control. Our consciousness tells us that we are in control of our affairs through our decisions and not the arrangement of natural phenomena.
God on the other hand is greater in intelligence than humans from the concept … we are not getting involved at this stage on finding the existence of God … but that is how we distinguish between faith and superstition - the conceptual constructs need to be correct. Regarding proof we always go back to what we have … and that is scripture and the Prophet (SAW) and his miracles … the recordings are true and historical as can be demonstrated by our extensive reference bibliography of transmissions of hadith, the burial chamber of the holy prophet (SAW) and various other artifacts that confirm the narrative.