TaskForce Essay: Science, Society & the University

MSTF14

0

By: Adil Najam Member localhost/muslim’s Task Force on Teaching of Science in Muslim World

Let us be clear on a few things, right at the outset: Science is not civilization. Science does not have a religion. Gravity comes from physics, not faith.

When we talk about ‘Muslim Science’, therefore, we’re not talking about science that in some mysterious way is ‘Islamic.’ We are talking, instead, of science that is just science – hopefully, good science – but happens to emanate from Muslim societies.

A major challenge before universities in the Muslim world is that they often reside in societies that still view science in civilizational terms. Policymakers who wish to improve the quality of science education in the Muslim world have often focused all their attention and investment towards what happens inside Universities and ignored the societal conditions necessary for these investments to pay dividend.

This essay offers 5 propositions about science and society in contemporary Muslim societies. These relate, respectively, to how our understanding of the lessons of history, the essence of science, the reality of demography, the power of policy and the purpose of pedagogy have been mediated by how science, society and the University have come together in Muslim societies. Between them, these propositions suggest that the scientific barrenness of the Muslim World is explained not only by what is happening in our Universities, but by what is not happening in our society The obvious implication, then, is that attention needs to be invested not only towards our universities but equally on Muslim society itself.

There is no claim that these are the only important propositions, nor is there is the space to explore each at length. However, between them they are designed to make an argument for shifting our attention beyond the University; towards society; but most of all towards that interface between society and the University. The contention being that policy will fail, or succeed at this interface; that science will blossom, or wither, also that this interface.

Proposition 1: History

Misunderstanding the so-called ‘Golden Age’ of Muslim science can have costly consequences

No discussion of Muslim Science can begin without the obligatory acknowledgement of the greatness of the ‘Golden Age’ of Muslim science. Let us also begin with that. But let us begin with the explicit recognition that the reason that the Golden Age produced great science – the science of Ibn-al-Haytham, of Al- Razi, of Ibn-Sina, of al-Biruni, of Al-Khwarizmi – is not because “their Islam” was somehow better than “our Islam,” or because scientists then were somehow “better Muslims” than they are today.

Naïvely, maybe, but also dangerously, the popular narrative in too many contemporary Muslim societies implicitly imagines such a connection. Depending on the direction of the assumed causality, an Islamic revival is seen as a prerequisite to scientific resurgence, or science becomes the force that will lead to an Islamic revival. Missed in this muddled correlation is the real nugget of gold that can and should be derived from whatever histories of that golden age that exist. That for a variety of reasons – technology, wealth, reach, discovery, religious interpretation – Muslim society had opened itself to rationality, to inquiry, and to doubt. That as those windows closed on the Muslim world, so did the golden age. That the golden sheen which we so exalt, was as much in the society that produced the age as it was in its scientists.

It is not a surprise, then, that narratives that begin with the adulation of that golden age, mostly end with calls to invest more in scientists or in making ourselves better Muslims. Both, of course, are desirable goals. But they miss the central lesson of that experience: that the goal of our investments is not just to produce good science, it is also to produce a society that can recognize, respect and respond to good science.

Proposition 2: Science

Good science comes from good questions; and good questions come from doubt and uncertainty

That a spirit of enquiry is central to the cultivation of good science is not a controversial idea. However, the corollary that such a spirit of enquiry requires a celebration of doubt and will be stifled in an environment of certitude can instil some agitation. Science is uncomfortable with certitude precisely because it is in the business of forever seeking new truths. Where religiosity undermines questioning, doubt and uncertainty, it can stifle the conditions that nurture good science.

This, of course, is not a challenge that is unique to Muslim societies. But it is a problem that we have long grappled with. Indeed, none other than the father of the scientific method, Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ḥasan ibn al-Haytham (or Alhazen), writing in the very early 11th century made the most persuasive case for the special place of doubt in the advancement of science:

Truth is sought for its own sake [but] truths are plunged in obscurity… the scientist is not preserved from error [nor] science from shortcomings and faults… Thus the duty of the man who investigates the writings of scientists, if learning the truth is his goal, is to make himself an enemy of all that he reads, and, applying his mind to the core and margins of its content, attack it from every side. He should also suspect himself as he performs his critical examination of it, so that he may avoid falling into either prejudice or leniency. (From Doubts Concerning Ptolemy, c1028CE)

A millennia later, this is still good advice. Universities in Muslim countries should widely share it with their students, faculty and beyond.

Proposition 3: Demography

The Muslim World is much larger than Muslim Countries

The term ‘Muslim world’ is mostly used to to refer to Muslim countries. It should not be so limited in scope. Certainly not when talking about science and scientists.

Consider the following: Although an overwhelmingly Hindu-majority country, India is also home to more Muslims than any country in the world except Indonesia. There are, most likely, more Muslim PhDs, scientists and researchers who live and work in the United States and Europe than in any given Muslim country. Certainly, the concentration of the most eminent, the most prolific and the most productive Muslim scholars resides outside of Muslim countries. That would include, for example, all of the only three Muslim scientists to win a Nobel award: Dr. Abdus Salam (Physics, 1979; originally from Pakistan; lived and worked in the United Kingdom and Italy); Dr. Ahmed Zewail (Chemistry, 1999; originally from Egypt; lived and worked in the United States); and Dr. Aziz Sancar (Chemistry, 2015; originally from Turkey, lived and worked in the United States).

Arguably, the Muslim world’s top scientists, best role models, and most valuable scientific minds do not live in Muslim countries. Even if some consider this an unfortunate reality, the reality is that the best ‘Muslim science’ today is happening outside of Muslim countries. It makes no sense to disown, disenfranchise, and discredit this great resource. Instead, we should embrace it. The best scientists will go – as they always have – where the best science is. More than that, new generations of Muslim scientists can emerge (are emerging) in non- Muslim societies.

In short, the assumption that the future revival of ‘Muslim science’ can only happen is Muslim countries is not only patently wrong, it is insulting to (too) many Muslim scientists.

Proposition 4: Policy

The University cannot not be a reflection of the society it is part of

Recent years have seen some welcome attention on the state of science in the Muslim world. In certain cases, including in my own country Pakistan, this attention has also led to significant investments of policy and resources. That investment, however, has not shown much by way of return. At least, not yet.

The policies seem to be sensible ones: invest more money into universities, especially in the sciences; improve salaries of researchers and professors; send scholars abroad for advanced training; establish rewards for teaching and research; build norms for better university management; improve infrastructure; provide support to students; develop metrics and rankings to reward good performance. Yet, there is disenchantment with the results. The number of universities has rocketed, but their quality has slid. There are more publications, but also more plagiarism. All universities have better infrastructure, very few – if any – have better teaching. Far more people roam about with PhDs, but the scholarly discourse seems stagnant or falling. Trapped in a fetish of measuring quantity, we see quality slipping all around us. Rankings come up with weird results, junk science is put on a pedestal, ghost journals abound.

Some lay the blame on bad implementation, on cronyism, on ill-conceived incentives, and even on too much money being spent in too much of a hurry. All of this may be true, but also true is another lesson that is too often ignored. A policy agenda – no matter how well-meaning or generous – that ignores the readiness of a society to accept and embrace it, and invests no attention in creating that readiness, is doomed to stumble. Incentives will fail where there is no tradition of quality control. Performance indicators become meaningless when there is no culture of merit. Rankings become a joke if they can be easily gamed.

The lesson that the policymaker must never forget is that societal change is not something that can be assumed, it is something that has to be consciously willed, meticulously crafted, earnestly created.

Proposition 5: Pedagogy

The University has a duty to shape, and constantly reshape, the society it is part of

To summarize the previous four propositions: history tells us that glory requires not only the brilliance of scientists but the support of society; science demands a society that values enquiry and celebrates doubt; the reality of demography is that Muslim society spans well beyond Muslim countries; and the lesson of policy is that without societal consent even the most well-meaning interventions will fail. If so, then who will bring about the societal readiness for good science that is so central to the success of the University?

The answer is obvious, although not intuitive: The University, of course.

Indeed, the contention of this proposition is that a fundamental purpose of the University is to shape, and constantly reshape, society. Just as society is reflected in the University, the University has the ability to shape society. It does this through the knowledge it produces, but much more by the habits of the mind that it instills in its students. This implies a focus on how we teach science, how much science we teach, but also – and importantly – what we teach beyond science. Especially, in how the humanities and social sciences are incorporated.

Teaching, in a University context, is as potent a tool for creating scientific excellence as research. In the context of scientifically less advanced societies, even more so. Yet, across the Muslim world, investments in advancing science in universities tend to be nearly entirely focused on research. As if a few people doing great science will turn the tide. The purpose of the university must be larger than that. It must to be to create an entire generation, an entire society that embodies a culture of enquiry. A culture, without which, even those few will not be able to do great science. The purpose of the University is more than just to produce good science; it is also to produce the conditions for good science to happen.

Readings

Dallal, Ahmad (2010). Islam, Science, and the Challenge of History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Guessoum, Nidhal (2011). Islam’s Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science. London: I.B. Tauris.

Hoodbhoy, Pervez (1991). Islam and Science: Religious Orthodoxy and the Battle for Rationality. London: Zed Books. Lyons,

Jonathan (2009). The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization. New York: Bloomsbury Press.

Masood, Ehsan (2006). Science and Islam. London: Icon Books.

Osama, Athar; Adil Najam, Shamsh Kassim- Lakha, Syed Zulfiqar Gilani, Christopher King (2009). “Pakistan’s Reform Experiment.” Nature, 461(7260): 38-39.

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein (1968). Science and Civilization in Islam. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein (2010). Islam in the Modern World: Challenged by the West, Threatened by Fundamentalism, Keeping Faith with Tradition. New York: HarperCollins.

World Bank (2000). Higher Education in Developing Countries: Peril and Promise. Washington D.C.: The World Bank.

Comments

comments