Bismi Allahi rrahmanirrahim.

Your statements outragiously disregard the very basic principle of logical discourse. The fact that Muslim countries were, eh, Muslim, and insufficient development of science and technology have little to do with each other and the latter fact is related only to the poor state of economic development.

As a Muslim, I have to agree with the premise that many Muslim countries “have scored badly on measures of science and technology “. I am of the belief that democratization regardless of whether the governments are secular or Islamist would reverse that trend. However, I am against generalizations westerners adopt when trying to analyze the Islamic world. The Islamic world is a diverse Society and applying the same standards to close to 1 billion people of different races and backgrounds is both simplistic and unrealistic. Malaysia is influenced more by its neighbors than by being a Muslim country. These generalizations do more harm to your understanding of Muslims in General than good.

I think the future may actually be good for science in the islamic world.
Why? The first few verses of the Quran to be revealed, started by commanding us to read, read, read...and then a few verses later the pen is mentioned as well and how God teaches mankind what they did not know. (chapter96). Also, the early muslim empires promoted learning, medicine, and science while they were on average more religious.

First of all the term Islamist is misleading for its translation in arabic is simply islam religion followers, not what is intended for it to mean. Second, science and ijtihad is one of the most pivotal parts of Islam as a religion. Although it is mostly pursued in areas other than those of concern to the west, it is still being followed by muslims. I am a research-scientist, and a muslim from a so called oil-rich country. In addition i am a female, true we don't have alot of interest in matters of investigating the unknown up to a level of the west world, but we are focused on matters related to human survival and maintanance of a constant environment. More applied than investigative or deciphering the unknown bits of the world. Another major issue is the fact that western publications shun our research and at times are more bias towards their own. In general its not the lack of science in the muslim world its rather lack of publicity of science. We do not lack the interest nor are we of lower levels of education, a proof is that we excell in western institutions and do great in research. Again the key highlight is information transfer, what you don't hear about you just don't know about. As for the current politics and terror related issues this only masked out more the other forms of science in muslim states and only projected those of concern to western world, which are mostly amplified by the media as well.

Islamic era science represents a traditional science. Traditional sciences like the Islamic, Hindu, Chinese, etc., flourished prior to 1500AD. The advent of (the historical) 'late middle ages', the associated periods of 'overseas exploration' and the 'period of discovery', proved to be a deathblow for many of the traditional sciences. (Note that the timeline [Nature, 2006; 444: 22-25, box-2] ends by 1500AD). Needless-to-say, by this time itself, i.e., 1500AD, the traditional sciences evolved to such an extent that even the modern-day scientists/researchers find them to be useful accurate references with regard to certain aspects.
Perhaps, leaving out the religious aspects, for the development of such traditional sciences, which unfortunately by their very nature are not open like the modern sciences, reverting back to where the governments were centuries earlier, would prove to be successful. Nevertheless, a gap of about 500 years would exist in such circumstances. Opinions might differ.

"Will things be any better or worse under the new Islamist governments?"

This question has already been addressed many times throughout history...
Things will be at best worse. The unifying concept behind all the muslim countries is Islam. Islam derives from the sacred texts comprising the Koran, Hadith and Sirat. Unfortunately the doctrine, history and current events show that Islam is consistent in its behavior towards non-muslim and women and is obviously incompatible with scientific, social and artistic progresses. How do you reform the perfect word of God anyway?
After all: "there is noo god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet"...

Part of the solution is relegating Islam to personal practices, out of the secular sphere. Indeed, the few progresses the muslim has witnessed have been occuring in Turkey. A somewhat more secular muslim state.

Its 'Islam and Science' rather than 'Science and Islam' that could be the only way to revive the scholarly investigating attitude among the muslim masses. Now, how do you measure level of science? I have been quite vociferous in denouncing a highly focussed way of judging science by the publication profile. This malpractice is undermining the very spirit of science in west and I wish revival of science in Islamic countries is not envisaged in these terms. One major step to revive scientific culture will be to bring back highly talented workforce. Keeping and recruiting good scientists from other countries should be the first priority for OIC to ponder upon.It will necessitate more scientific institutions and an infrastructure to support the young people committed in this direction.

Sir,

There is no doubt that science in the Muslim world is in bad shape, if not a nonexistent entity. As alluded to by Herwig Schopper, the reasons for this “appalling status of science” in the Muslim world are multiple: lack of resources in many parts of the Muslim world, corruption and cronyism, ongoing conflicts, from Africa to Asia, brain drain, and so forth and so on. Unfortunately, much of these problems are ones that can be rectified by the sound and evidence-based approaches of the sciences. What is working to the advantage of the Muslim societies, however, is the elevated status of scientific knowledge in the minds of Muslims, a potential that remains to be tapped. Thus, the suggestion that “Islamist” leadership tends to “suppress free-inquiry and critical-minded scholarship” is clearly one based on preconceived assumption that anything Islamic is prone to be problematic. Where is the evidence for this, given that there is no clear benchmark that can be used to assess the problem? Also, while reading the feature, one gets the feeling that Islamic identity is interchangeable with Arab identity. Obviously singularizing Islam leads to overt generalizations of the obstacles faced by the pluralistic and diverse entities of the wider Muslim world. For instance, Somalia, my native homeland in the Horn of Africa, faces different problems (lack of resources, chronic civil war, etc) than our brethren in the Middle East or Southeast Asia. I should mention that recently a popular uprising, led by “islamist” group, seems to be a ray of hope that can lift this nation from ruins. And if the Somali experience is to teach us anything, it is that in the absence of undemocratic and restricted regimes, businesses flourished and although immature and not of good quality, ten or so universities have been established in Somalia even in the absence of central government. It is an open secret that telecommunications and cell phone services are far better in Somalia then the rest of Africa. Unfortunately, as is the case elsewhere, Somalis are end-users of technology developed in the west. But would the new Islamist group hinder this “relative” progress? Not a chance, based on anecdotic evidence, such as reason public challenge of the group’s leader on university campus by a brave female student querying him on how they would deal with women, why problems must be solved by the barrel of gun and not use “our brains” as she put it, and interviews they have given based on this particular subject. In short, although the premise of the question posted is based on Muslim stereotype, one that amounts to a slur, nevertheless the recommendations made in this news feature and the prognosis of the problems facing the Muslim world are excellent and could lead to meaningful steps. The first step of this process must be admission on our part that we got an issue and we need to address it. Obviously those of us, Muslim scientists, living in the western world have a role to play in this process.

I would just like to comment briefly on the last point made by Abdi. Somalia is the latest country to fall to Islamism. In this case it seems to be the system of choice for the majority of ordinary Somali citizens who have had enough of 15 years of no central government. Now, thanks to the Islamists, large parts of the country are reported to be more stable, business is picking up. I was at a meeting recently where the the North American Somali diaspora, which contributes arguably the largest share of national income, was in total support for the new regime. But the Supreme Council of the Islamic Courts, which is in effective charge, is a coalition of different Islamist groups and it is unclear which tendency [so-called moderates, or those with more extreme ideas] will win out in the end. Those readers who remember the 1979 Iranian revolution will recall that for the first couple of years, the revolutionaries were a coalition of groups comprising Islamic modernisers at one end, and traditional clerics on the other. But within a few short years, most if not all of the modernisers had been either killed, put under arrest, or purged from the government. Its a lesson that those in the diaspora who are cheering the Islamic courts will do well not to forget.

My opinion:

If there is no science in the "Muslim" world, then there is no Islam. Islam, to me, is much more than rituals and brown skin. It is an ever growing understanding of reality and coming more and more to harmony with it.

Islam led to the renaissance, but renaissance lost the so called 'Muslim' world when that world lost the Sipirt of Islam.

Letter is dead without the Spirit!

I thaink much have to pay to the youth in Islam.The religion of Allah the most high.
Especially we those in Africa little is done to raise us up to the top of the ladder as far as science is concern.I am a scientist but am being left behind because am in Ghana and no one care about we the muslim youth.
Much is concern the christiandom.
May Allah help us.

It is not fair to say that Islam is responsible for the low scientific productivity of Islamic countries. Islamic book "The Holey Quraan" strongly encourages Muslims to look, see, discover and think. In Islam caliphate you can see clearly major achievements of Muslim scholars. Even in the present, one can find numerous Muslim scientists have major achievement in science for example: Dr Ahmed Zoeil, Nobel Prize. If you would like to be fair, you should relate that low profile lays upon the current undemocratic governments that do not provide the facilities, strategies and the atmosphere needed for research.

islam,origionaly, is agree with science.mohammad(the prophet of God)said:learn the science even it's in china.you know that it's a long distance between saudi arabia and china.but what does the islamic government think about the science is another issue.I think these countries need a shock to see where they are standing in the world of science,and what they do for improving it.they must be helped and they must be gotten up from their long sleep.actualy there are a lots of people in islamic countries that want to develope the science,the same as other contries.

I'm agree about that science does not have good shape in Islamic countries
but we have a lot of scientist in Iran like , aboo ali sina , Dr.hesaabi ,...
and now Dr.firoozi in nasa . we have alot of scientist but we don't have any management
and direction . we choose a bad way If we use are power and do our culture
we will succeed . Iran is a historical place and it had science in past in hakhaamaneshian period

If we succeede in going back to the true values fo Islam -- We will defeinitely be leading the world in science and technology.

If you read history, Science in Islam prosperd WHEN the true Islamic tachings and Sharia were inforced .... & we lost our leadership in scince when we stoppped following them .....

For your question
"..... Islamist regimes, and Islamic law. What does this mean for Muslim scientists and science?"

I will be more happy & relaxed --- The problem today doesn't lie in Islamic law -- but the people who misuse them ... & are curropt

We belive and we know taht Islamic laws are golden and stay forever ---

Intellectual objectivity, rational discourse, belief in universal human rights, respect for women, the humility to acknowledge the limitations of overly theocratised minds - these are all lacking in the narrow Islamist worldview that continues to stunt the growth of scientific, artistic, political thinking everywhere from Afghanistan to Pakistan. The result? Mediocrity and a perverse jealousy of the achievements of academics, artists and intellectuals in secular non-Islamic environments. How sad to witness otherwise intelligent Muslims claiming pride in the fact that Islam did, once, seven or so centuries ago, have something to contribute to intellectual development and thought. It's time to grow up and face reality. We need to modernise Islam and stop hiding the fact that the majority of Islamic states are trying to Islamise modernity instead.

The first verse which was revealed on Prophet Muhammad (P.B. U. H.)started with the word Iqra (read) and many times in the Holy Quran the emphasis is on to think over the fuctioning of the universe. History is evident that as long as the muslims were close to Islam they were leading the world in science. No one can deny the contributions of Jabbir bin Hayan, Bu Ali seena, Ibn Alhasim. But as they went away for Islam then they lost their position in science. Hopefully the regime shift from the autocraic non-Islamic to democratic truely Islamic will help in improving the situation of science in these countries.

Jonathan B knows very little about the subject he opinions about, and injects his “evil ideology”. I am a Muslim, a female and the amount of support, encourgement, advice from all spheres Muslim life has been great & helped me enormousely. From the men in my family to my fantastic Imams, Mullahs, maulanas, families, community has been a continuos great source of support.

What I can say is that without the Muslim countries financing of western research - an enormous source of funding from Muslim countries – sending their nationals for education in the west – where would the western science be? I have always been against funding the west better to invest in the home countries. The racism in west and with their false arrogant ignorance is clearly one based on preconceived ideas.

Some reports have already mentioned the loss of research funds now that the oil rich Arab countries are turning East. China’s need & interest in Africa should be made a success story in science and I am sure Somalia will take the right path, no one wants to be dependent. Our major interest is on cooperation with China. Less preconceived ideology.

I totally agree with Mohammad Azhar Aziz. I found a number of names on the scientific paper that I did not know. Where do the names come from?
Who are they?
Does the practical work done by a Research/Scientific/Technical assistant merit a name of the PhD student who has no idea what NaCl is?
Why should Research/Scientific/Technical assistant practical work be attributed to a PhD student when the student has not done the practical/investigative work and is helped by a Tutor/Lecturer to write up the thesis?

I support Abdi Mohamed and say that the Islamist are a ray of hope. Why should the Islamist discourage science? Clearly the change will and is coming from Muslims in the west who wants to share their knowledge in the true Islamic ways.

I am an American-Israeli, thus have a close-but-distant point of view. Some time ago I researched the status of Seawater desalination research and found that many good articles had been authored by Moslem researchers in both the West and in Arab countries. This supports the thesis expressed by more than one commentor, that in Arab-Moslem countries the R&D is mostly for practical, immediate problems solving. Nothing wrong with that! The claim that in the West there is bias against research results coming from Moslem countries is quite untrue I suggest; it is more a question of relevance to the topics of research of interest in the West. One geographic area where the interests intersect is Israel. In the topics of desalination, arid-agriculture, eco-preservation, and others including archaeology, there is as much interest in Israel as in the (arid) countries that profess Islam, yet how much contact is there between the Arabic speaking countries and Israel? If complaining against a virtual embargo by the West, I suggest first overcoming a real embargo by Arabic speaking Moslem researchers and institutions, against Israel.

Apropos to some insightful postings, I would like to further state about a model of developing science in the whole world, with special emphasis on muslim masses as they are the focus of discussion here.
Science in its true form was inspired either by the quest for knowing the nature around us or to develop ways that can make human lives better Model of Science presented by west has failed in both these aspects. It has been relegated to publishing papers and getting grants. A true model of science should be able to develop the faculty of reasoning and serve as a fountain head of knowledge and information that could help the human beings and provide them a better life. A promising step in this direction could be set by the 'Janelia farm' concept floated by HHMI.
A very simple point to ponder - "Why people in west with all amenities and developments can't sleep well???"

To say that things will be better is naive and falsely idealistic. Trust me, I say that with a very heavy heart. Not in the next generation anyway. Not until the leaders of the Muslim regimes are freed from the burdens of their emotional, cultural, and spiritual baggage. We have to rid ourselves of racism, tribalism, arrogance and misogynism in order to advance socially as well as scientifically. Dont think racism is a problem in the muslim world? Go study the Darfur conflict. Ponder the results of it. It doesnt take a genious to see the correlation between spiritual disease and social (including scientific) stagnation. Lets not forget that scientific advancement is absolutely a blessing from God, and its not one that Muslims can expect just because they've gone and dressed up a country in thaubs and niqabs...we have many diseases of the heart that must be individually purified. Only then can we expect to be blessed with true scientific advancement, advancement that contains the blessing of the Creator. I'll just mention as an example that many of the medical "advancements" in the past 20 years in America have done little more that financially benefit large pharmaceutical companies that coincidentally fund the research behind said advancements. Is this what we're calling 'advancement'? I guarantee you that in 20 more years, if we haven't destroyed human civilization with all our "advancements" , we will look back and wonder what the heck we were thinking. I say that because even now we can look back and say "oh my, look at all the harm we ended up doing". Case in point: the steroids in closed head injury debate/ CRASH study. If you dont know about this, ask maulana google.
Muslims were historically blessed with true enhanced knowledge of the creation at times when the souls of the believers were more pure. Im no historian, but I think this correlation is obvious if you read history.

Is this a joke?

Ok after that cover I can easily question the scientific aspect of Nature. Do world’s scientific progress come to such a pitiful state that we have started to discuss religion in one of the most respected scientific journals of our era? If we are starting to categorize and discriminate the scientific research depending on the religion, the next step will most probably be categorization of scientists in the world according to their races and ethnicity so we can start a worldwide “witch hunt” driven by your new brilliant inquisition.

Wake up!

Science does not have any borders drawn by religions or governments. And as a personal question to the editorial board of this “respected” scientific journal, what do you expect to gain by publishing your journal with such a cover? What is the scientific significance and multidisciplinary aspect of your revolutionary discrimination? Should we expect to see Nature as a great popular magazine like the Times in the near future?

PS: Also I want to suggest that your next cover should be about the impact of Hollywood celebrities on science.. (I honestly prefer to see Penelope Cruz on the cover)

This comment is meant sa a general statement with the recognition that speaking of Islam or Islamic countries and lumping them together is somewhat simplistic. It is odd to see how science and knowledge prospered in newly conquered nations under the aegis of Islam. No where was this more evident than in Spain where Islam and western ideas mingled and corss fertilized each other. In these times Islam was less 'arabized' than now. Wahhabism, neo-Deobandiam, Salafists and those of the Muslim Brotherhood have emphasized an idealized and, in part, mythical past. It down plays major portions of the sayings of Muhammed and dominant themes in the Koran. Beleivers told to beware of clerics now follow them rather blindly. Jihadism creates a 6th pillar where 5 were given. Seek knowledge is now limited to seek knowledge only in the Koran and traditions. Muhammed was a great innovator in his society. Yet, the more radical and increasingly dominant forces in the middle east condemn 'innoavation'- although they themselves have radically altered true Islam. It has been this so-called traditionalists that have cast a huge weight around the dynamism and innovations initiated by Muhammed. Those forces breathed their last breath in the middle east long before they merged and pasted into the western society form Andalusia.
No society that places such huge limitations on the aspirations of at lest 1/2 of its brain power solely for the agrandisement of the egos of little men will never restore itself to prominence until it rids its self of this radicalist disease. The Koran speaks of justice, mercy etc. in at least 192 verses and the sword, revenge, rape and murder in 17, and those latter only in a specific and past context. Too bad the little men are killing Islam.

I remain baffled that such a prestigious journal like Nature could publish such demeaning articles about Muslim scientists.

I am a female Muslim scientist who has published articles in Nature. Now, I am ashamed to be associated with a journal that so wrongly categorizes the scientists in Muslim countries.

The editorial board of Nature should retract above published articles.

I just like to make several responses to some points made above. For one, the past glories days of Muslms are just that, past. I agree with Shahan on this point. Aside from historical prospective, it really doesn’t do us any good to always refer to those glories days and this is, at least to me, a major issue. Muslims seem to be stuck on those days, and it is about time we move on. Shahan is wrong on his assertation that Islamist ideologies lack “Intellectual objectivity, rational discourse, belief in universal human rights, respect for women, the humility to acknowledge the limitations of overly theocratised minds…” To me this are all based on preconcieved assumptions and Muslim stereotypes. But Ehsan Masood made an excellent point interms of classifying Islamist as ones with modern tendicies and ones with extremist views. My point is that we tend to dismiss anything “islamic” as problematic. We need a new experiment in which we encourage and deal with modernists and establish cooperation and connections with them, thereby isolating and minimizing the impact of the extremist elements within this leadership. Modernists are the ones that support reason and rationality, encourage excellence in the sciences and as of now, we shun all and dismiss all. My argument is we need new experiments in terms of our relation with these new Islamist leadership. As for the muslim societies, they are in need of “New Deal.”

It was disappointing to search over the internet and finding a magazine like yours that blames a religion for lack of development in science rather than blaming it on corrupt/who use religion for their own means by twisting it/self-centered/western-supported puppets that prevent the excellence of science. Wished the editors did better research! If enough honest research is done on Islam and the Islamic history, you will be surprised to find that Islam is logic and promotes logic and reasoning and finding out in detail about how and why God made this complex universe. Pls visit this website for those who really want to know about Islamic scientists who practised Islam to the truest way under the most faithful and good Islamic rulers and brought the Islamic world to the top while the west was in the 'Dark Ages': http://www.muslimheritage.com/

It is tough to say that Muslim scientists or scientific development would flourish under Islamist or secular regimes and there is no comparative data to support either argument. For example, there is modest scientific development under Iran’s Islamist government as well as that of secular Turkey. But, there is no question that scientific development has miserably failed under the current secular Islamic governments. On the other hand, it might be premature and unwise to propose that Muslim scientists would do better under Islamist rule.

The poor scientific performance is not something particular to the Islamic world but it is rather a common trend in many developing countries. The scientific failure of developing countries is either result of poor governance or lack of financial resources—it could be combination of both. In the case of the Islamic world, it is more of poor governance and misuse of petrochemical wealth and it is very important to create an environment conducive for scientific growth. In addition, there is no shortage of suggestions and blueprints on what to do but there is real shortage of alternatives to what didn’t work. Please refer to a letter of correspondence of mine published at Nature (Vol 425:237).

I would suggest an alternative paradigm since shift from secular to Islamist or vice versa (governmental reforms) seems more risky or very sensitive issue, especially when dealing with insecure regimes or when the system is questioned by non-Muslims. I would suggest a grassroots social movement that might not threaten the ruling groups and scientific development would thrive well under gradual reforms in order to avoid a massive social disruption. The alternative paradigm would encourage the following initiatives: 1) Where wealthy Muslim entrepreneurs and philanthropists establishing centers of scientific excellence at Islamic world; and 2) Establishing citizen initiated legislative measures (Propositions) to bypass bureaucracy in order to allocate more funding for scientific institutes and capacity building.

I am hoping to see community conversations along these lines and whether citizen initiated legislative measures, entrepreneurial, and philanthropic initiatives could improve the situation of scientists in Islamic world.

I am a Muslim scientist and currently residing in the west. The lack of scientific development in the Islamic world is due to economical, political reasons and not related to religion. In fact Islam encourages scientific enquiry and if you observe closely followers of the current religious organizations (such as muslim brotherhood) are young educated Muslims. In fact, what is needed is political leadership and creation of institutions that can attract best researchers irrespective of their beliefs.

@Abdikadir: I would argue that oil revenues in many arab muslim countries would enable a funding of science far more generous than in most western countries (certainly, my current abode, Italy.)
@Dirie: see above. As to religious reasons, I understand that according to certain muslim clerics (I do not have the ref at hand) Allah's unbounded freedom basically devoids of significance the very concept of natural law, and therefore any investigation thereof. So it would sound like science is something of an apostasy, if perhaps tolerable or tolerated.
Besides doctrinal arguments, though, what appears to dominate many in the arab world is a tendency to self-victimize to the detriment of enterprise, scientific or otherwise. That state of affairs may or may not have to do with internal political oppression (see Saudi Arabia and Iran), but certainly has little to do with economic factors, accounting for oil and gas supplies in those countries.

The consensus seems to be that the real brakes to modern science in the Moslem world is the autocratic regime style in power almost everywhere - only Turkey is to a large degree less authoritarian. Though the pride in past achievements in the MidAges was well earned - it is indeed a past laurel. The call I hear is for liberalization of society, less autocracy, less theocracy, and more freedom at all levels beginning with grass-roots and in education. I strongly urge more modern education at the child level. The Moslem world needs to wean itself from the Madrassa approach that fogs up people's minds with mere religion. The Moslem world need to return to its open minded roots, and overcome the heavy hand and shabarrya of Wahhabism.

I think the title is not accurate and not fair at all to blame Islam. Just look at the Muslim scientist at the world. They are in each lab all over the world and most of them are real Muslim. I have seen them my self in many institutes in Europe. The problem is with the poverty rather with Islam. Moreover, Muslim state in medieval ages has leaded the world science and carried the science torch for many, many centuries. And at that time none of the Muslim scientists has wrought about Christianity and science!!!!

Its amazing for me to see the lack of understanding of many to blame Islam, the religion, for every single thing that is happening may it be terrorism or in these case the progress of science. Islam has always encourage and in a way 'demands' its followers to seek knowledge. And this by itself is JIHAD. I think the problem i see is that we as muslims are living in the glory of the past. Yes, we have achieved great things during the golden years of the Islamic Civilization. But what are we doing now to rise up to such tremendous achievements??? We have as muslims should countinue to work together with others whatever their beliefs might be to work together in the field of science for the good of ALL MANKIND. ISLAM demands that.

I have read this “special” and I must say that I am extremely disappointed and saddened by the fact that a journal of the stature of “Nature” decided to publish this superficial and sophomoric collection of inanities. Allow me to list some of the most glaring deficiencies and defects in the publication:
1. You introduce the issue with repeated references to "Muslim science". Why do they think "Muslim science" is a reasonable unit of analysis, but not "Hindu science", "Buddhist science" or even "Christian science"? We are talking about 50 countries with little in common beyond the allegiance of varying proportions of their population to one somewhat heterogeneous religious tradition. It may be (as the most extreme detractors and most extreme adherents of Islam are equally eager to claim) that there is something special about the adherents of Islam and in their case (and their case alone), it makes sense to define them by religion rather than by geography, culture, ethnicity or any other criterion. But this is a fraught and complex debate and the editors of "Nature", far from making a sensible contribution to it, do not even seem to be aware of its existence!
2. The editors state that: "There has never been a greater need for the measured, evidence-based approach to problems that comes from scientific training. Its contribution may be small amid the current turbulence, but it is all the more worth pursuing." But having said that, none of the contributors (with the exception of Nader Fergany) exhibit any signs of having taken their own advice. Party slogans and pop-culture bromides take the place of any attempt at analysis. One contributor states "In the late nineteenth century, Darwin's On the Origin of Species had a favorable reception in Muslim countries."; how did he reach that conclusion? The great mass of Muslims was not even aware of the most elementary achievements of Modern science. The traditionally trained theologians had very little to say about Darwin and when they did find something to say, it was almost wholly negative. The acceptance of evolution by a few western trained intellectuals hardly constitutes "favorable reception". Equally careless statements are made about the history of "Islamic science", the nature of politics in Muslim countries and the nature of Islam itself. The level of historiography and analysis on display would be an embarrassment in a good quality high school. In “Nature” it is downright shameful. One expects a higher standard of discourse from the premier scientific journal in the world.
3. The contributors repeatedly refer to a purported golden age of rationality and science in the Middle East about a thousand years ago. For example, asking Muslims to "reclaim... a great Islamic past in which new knowledge was valued and scholars were free to pursue all lines of enquiry". The reality is much more complicated than that. Islam as a religious tradition is not especially open to outside influences. Like all other religious traditions, it absorbed much from the older traditions that existed in its area of influence, but it was rarely willing to openly admit such cultural borrowing and the doctors of Islam (like their counterparts in other traditions) tended to do their borrowing surreptitiously. The civilization that resulted was not especially enlightened by modern standards. Slavery was widespread, women were kept out of public life and free enquiry was frequently suppressed at the whims of one or the other absolutist ruler. At the same time, the culture was vibrant and creative and amidst the usual medieval cruelty and caprice, individuals (not all of them Muslim) made multiple original contributions to human knowledge. That is all very well, and is a valid area of inquiry and comment, but a serious journal like "Nature" should either steer clear of this topic or make a sensible and scholarly contribution to it. Repeating fashionable nostrums because they suit the propaganda needs of the day is justifiable in mass communication but is a disservice to science.
4. You state that in Iran and Pakistan, the rise of political Islam has been accompanied by increases in university education and scientific activity. What (if any) is the causal connection between these events? What would have happened to universities without the rise of political Islam? Again, is "Islam" even the correct unit of analysis in this case? Can the particular histories of Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia be described by one common descriptor "Islam"? One article displays a figure showing the greatest increase in scientific output has occurred in Iran and Turkey. Since one is avowedly “Islamic” and the other avowedly “secular”, an intelligent observer may be excused for wondering if something other than “Islam” explains or links these results. But the editors of “Nature” seem to have made a policy decision to divide the world into the “house of Islam” and the “house of unbelief” and having boxed themselves in, they end up making nonsensical comparisons between apples and oranges. One can have intelligent arguments about whether it is a good idea for a science journal to collect data on “Muslim countries versus non-Muslim countries” (without defining either?), but the contributors to this issue do not make any of these arguments. Instead, they prefer to skirt all tough questions and gloss over all difficulties in a series of articles of breathtaking superficiality.
5. The articles provide very little hard information. We learn next to nothing about the actual state of science in these countries and even less about the possible explanations for their lack of scientific development. Surely the editors of “Nature” could have made an effort to come up with some hard data or rethink their conceptual assumptions if no data could be found in the categories they had chosen?
6. The whole affair was apparently paid for the Kuwaiti foundation for the advancement of Sciences. The less said about that the better, so I will restrict myself to lamenting that an institution like "Nature" may have allowed itself to be debased for rather mercenary motives.
In summary, a terrible disappointment and one that a serious science journal could do without.

[See this comment rebutting that last point. Ed]

muslims worldwide need more education-in all fields of learning-as the saying goes"to learn and get knowledge even go to china"-this was a time when europe was laging behind and the red indians were happy in their hunting grounds. But the times have changed and one has to catch up. This is hard work which is lacking.

Hi/Salaam folks!

Interesting debate about Muslim Knowledge culture. I think it would be better if we didnt get defensive, this collective discussion is too important for that. I realise that this is hard during these times, when the framing of the discussion is as it is and the metrics of 'scientific fluency'used are so lame, ahistoric and without justification!

Muslim societies, like many others that are recovering from colonial abuse and post colonial self abuse, have been grappling with the knowledge/learning issue for a long time, often under much more difficult historical conditions than today. The colonial and postcolonial conditions as well as internal movements of thought must be addressed to make fuller sense of the whole picture.

I agree with many of the views above, that political and economic factors are weighed against us. It is not an impossible challenge (though i do speak with a bangladesh and uk centric experience)

There is much to be optimistic about,

There are thousands of talented researchers all over the place, yearning to contribute to the lands of their ancestors, but without a conveyor belt.

These days our science ministers have science degrees! whoopee!

The first generation of post independance planners and officials have realised that half bakedness is not working, and now consult national experts.

The hybridisation experiments between madrassa and 'colonially constructed' forms of education and knowledge production continue.

The more powerful segments (and significant in this scenario) of Muslim society are realising the links between a knowledge culture based on their values and the dignity and prosperity that follows.

The development industry has failed and is in its death throws (in oic countries, if not the western public imagination), and alternatives to hiring expensive foreign consultants are becoming more attractive.

'Islamists'(a recent post 1930s effort)are opening up and realising that they dont have the solution to every problem under the sun in the tomes of yester year.

Cheer up.

Finally, I want to comment about the 'glory days' approach that Muslims have to our history. I dont think its the best approach that will catalyse muslim minds to the extend we need alone. Yes it is a source of pride and confidence, but today we need to make our own meal, eat and share it with others.

To whom it may concern:

A copy of your latest issue on "Science and Islam" came across my desk a few days back. Its cover is striking.

At its center is an image of a crescent, positioned atop a geometric-legged structure that one cannot definitively identify as a (mosque?). A play of shadow and light meld the elements in the structure together, so that it appears as one, and imbue it with a feeling of ominousness.

What stands out most in the image is its striking resemblance to a basic virus structure: head, tail and tail fibers included! I initially assumed this was not intentional, but the resemblance is clear and the slant of your articles further confirms my fears. I hope I err in this constatation. If not, I hope the editors will address my concern publicly.

The following article is of relevance to this discussion:

----------------
The Nobel Prize and Muslims

By Saleem H. Ali

Published in The Daily Times (Pakistan), October 22, 2006

While many Islamic countries continue to claim victimization in the “ war on terror”, it is interesting to note that since September 11, 2001, three of the six individual Nobel peace laureates have been Muslims. Their area of recognition has spanned the spectrum from human rights activism (Shirin Ebadi, 2003) to nuclear vigilance (Muhammad Elbaredei, 2005) to micro-credit entrepreneurship (Muhammad Yunus, 2006). What is perhaps even more astonishing is that in the 106-year history of the Nobel peace prize there are only two other Muslims who have been so honored. Anwar Saadat (1978) and Yassir Arafat (1994) shared the prize with Israeli leaders for highly variable and controversial contributions to peace-building in the Middle East.

Out of more than five hundred Nobel laureates in the sciences only two have been of Muslim lineage. Pakistan can claim one of them: Abdus Salam, who shared the prize in physics in 1979, and memorably wore a shervani and turban to the award ceremony in Sweden. However, as a member of the Ahmadiya community, he was regrettably spurned at home as a non-Muslim. The other Muslim science laureate is Ahmed Zewail, an Egyptian-American chemist based at the California institute of Technology who received the prize for chemistry in 1999.

The reason for the paucity of Muslim laureates in the sciences is perhaps the relative intellectual inertia in educational institutions in many Muslim countries. There is a tendency to atavistically celebrate the accomplishments of tenth century Muslim mathematicians, while investing little in developing contemporary educational capacity. Far too often we hear from imams about the etymology of algebra coming from Arabic and the pharmaceutical accomplishments of Avicenna but do we ask why more of such great scholars have not been seen for a thousand years in Islamic countries?

Those Muslims who are educated and proceed to develop successful professional careers are often sanguine with a comfortable job but would rather not invest in cutting-edge creativity. An interesting example is the medical profession in which many Muslims, and indeed Pakistani Muslims have excelled considerably. However, most of these brilliant doctors are focused on making money in clinical practice rather than in creative research which would lead to laurels such as the Nobel prize. There is cultural complacence that leads to a mindset where success is marked by simply making a good living for the family, contributing some earnings to charity and then living a lavish life.

As for the recent Muslim peace laureates what is even more striking is that many Muslims have rejected their efforts and refused to accept them as role models, and instead labeling them as stooges of the West.

I was amazed at the reaction of one Canadian Muslim professor to the Nobel prize awarded to Muhammad Yunus this year. There was spiteful criticism of Dr. Yunus as a narcissist who was charging exorbitant un-Islamic interest rates to the destitute. As with Shirn Ebadi and Muhammad Elbaredei, frequent charges were also leveled by many Muslims that Dr. Yunus was also a “stooge of the West.” While there are some valid critiques of the Grameen bank model in Bangladesh, it is unfortunate that any novel idea has to be met with such contrarian zeal with few alternative solutions. The overall picture is fairly clear: Bangladesh is at least showing strongly positive signs of development, as measured by indicators developed by Pakistan’s own celebrated economist, the late Mahbub-ul-Haq (who may well have become the first Muslim to win the Nobel prize in economics had he lived long enough).

According to the director of the UN’s Human Development Report, Kevin Watkins, Bangladesh has seen child mortality falling at an annual rate 50% higher than India and in 2006 the child survival rate is better in Bangladesh than in India or Pakistan. This is especially remarkable for a country that has all natural odds against it with annual floods, cyclones and a capricious agricultural climate.

Let us now turn to this year’s other Muslim Nobel laureate, Orhan Pamuk of Turkey who won the Nobel Prize for literature. The late Egyptian writer Naguib Mahfouz is the only other Muslim writer to have won this prize. Both of these writers have been known to marginalize their Islamic identity at various times, and perhaps the literature prize mirrors the peace prize in its political message. Just as Gandhi was denied the peace prize despite being an inspiration to so many later laureates, some Muslim writers may claim a measure of discrimination here, contending that only a certain liberal elite are even considered seriously. Perhaps many Urdu poets such as Iqbal who were widely known in the West were deprived of the prize for being too “Islamic?” In the case of Mr. Pamuk, one Turkish writer commented in the Wall Street Journal that he “has not taught anyone anything they didn’t already know but has made precisely the right noises that the progressive arbiters of taste in Europe like to hear.”

Alfred Nobel, the man who perfected the alchemy of dynamite, could scarcely have imagined how momentous his legacy would be for times to come. Every autumn we await the announcements from Scandinavia about this most coveted of international honors. As the pantheon of laureates grows larger and more diverse, the Islamic contribution to this prize remains relatively small. This is a time for introspection among Muslims and non-Muslims alike regarding the means and merits of such rewards, and how best to use them as incentives for improving the human condition.

I do not agree with the analysis and the argument. It is a well known fact that science in the Muslim world made tremendous advancements in an era when the governments were neither secular nor democratic. It is basically the social and academic culture of a particular society that lays foundation for further advancement. The lack of advancement in science and teachnology in the Muslim world today is because of lack of political stability and corruption. This state of affairs is perpetuated because of the patronage by the so called democratic governemnts of the west, particulalrly the USA.

I agree with Mohammad Hashim Kamali that The Islamic concept of knowledge encompasses transcendental knowledge as well as knowledge that is based on sense perception and observation. Islam also lays emphasis on beneficial knowledge that advances human welfare and seeks to utilize the resources of the universe for sound and beneficial purposes. The Qur'anic doctrine of vicegerency (khilafah) also places on Man, as a trustee and custodian of the earth, the responsibility to build the earth and utilize its resources with a sense of justice to oneself, one's fellow humans, the environment and other inhabitants of the earth. Scientific observation, experimental knowledge and rationality are the principal tools that can be employed in the proper fulfillment of this mission. Islam's perception of knowledge is thus value-oriented and informed by ethical and theological concerns. Many Muslim commentators have seen this as a basic pattern of harmony, rather than conflict, between Islam and science. But since the greatest achievements in science and technology at the present age are associated with Western civilization, the Islamic proposition of basic harmony is not the accepted framework in that context. The West's perception of religion and science does not recognize any link between the two and does not commit science to any structure of values outside its own perimeters.

To Hilmy:
The mosque featured on Nature's cover is the Faisal mosque in Islamabad. Any similarity you may see between it and a virus structure is purely in the eye of the beholder - I can assure you there was never any intention to convey a hidden meaning with this image. You can learn more about the striking architecture of the Faisal mosque here:
http://www.islamicarchitecture.org/architecture/faisalmosque.html

I am completely agree with the author that muslim world is shamefully ignorant of scientific knowledge and lacking any system of research. What could be the reason of this? answer is only one, dictatorship which is practically and strongly supported by the west. Few dictators have made hostage of more than one billion population of muslim world and these dictators make policies which benifits only the existance of their regime.

In the name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Most Gracious

I have been silently reading all the comments on this article but I did not see anybody pointing to deprived Muslim youth. I will repeat one thing; Islam is the first religion inviting people to think over various phenomena like changing of day into night and development of a baby in mothers womb …… so stop blaming Islam to be a hindrance in the way of scientific development. Rather this is the corrupt Muslim leadership, which has been looting public money for centuries, just for their own luxuries. The Muslim world has become chronically deficient in scientific community because public money is being spent on luxurious lives of born Rulers rather than brilliant muslim youth. On one side there are Arabian princes who spend millions of dollars for beautiful prostitutes and sports cars and on the other side there are bright Muslim students who cannot even pay fees at a well reputed western university added that there is not even a single worth mentioning university in Muslim world. Summarizing in one line; bright Muslim youth does not have resources to study science and those who have resources, they have nothing to do with science but prostitutes, palaces and cars. A small percentage of Arabian riches spent on young Muslim scientists can bring a revolution in scientific development of Muslim world. Finally I request the western world to STOP the FASHION of blaming Islam for every menace.

Sir,let's imagine a situation: give some money to a kid who is well fed and has the best clothes. What will he do?? Obviously spend on needless goodies. Give the same money to a kid who has been hungry for days at end and he will use it to buy food and satisfy his hunger first and then think of goodies. Money here is resources, the former kid is the west with anything and everything at their disposal and the latter is the so called "Islamist" middle east which still has to gather a lot of resources to ensure trouble free survival of its masses. This has nothing to do with religion.

Contrary to a statement above, nobody paid Nature to publish our articles. The Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Science is sponsoring the translation of our articles into Arabic, and their distribution.

The comments above, and hopefully more to come, will certainly be considered as we think about future coverage.

Most important area to work is good and loyal leadership and that should come from middle class level.Most countries in the muslim world have dictators or kings which is totaly unacceptable .

In the name of God, the most Compassionate, the most Merciful,

Religion and science are two major aspects of life. Religion (or to worship something more superior and powerful) has been around since the day humankind was created. In every epoch, in every land, human beings felt a need to believe in something which they can seek refuge when they are in need of protection, relief, solace and peace of mind. Whether you believe in a religion or not, it plays, perhaps, the biggest role in our lives everyday. Science, on the other hand, is the culmination of all the endeavors that mankind expended in search of unraveling the mysteries of the universe.

The first verse of Koran (Islam’s holy text) revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was “Read (Iqra'): In the name of thy Lord Who created”, which accentuates the significance of seeking knowledge and acquiring wisdom. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), in one his hadiths, says “seek knowledge even unto China”, when China was the remotest center of civilization known then. Islam deems learning as a lifelong pursuit and it is incumbent upon every Muslim man and woman, and education is considered to last from cradle to grave. Having mentioned these fundamental principles of Islam, no one has a right to blame Islam for their backwardness and underdevelopment. It is, in the first place, owing to the negligence of Muslims and their failure to catch up with the rapid progress in science and technology. This sequence of failures led to a severe decline in the Islamic civilization, which is still lingering. Therefore, Muslims in general are demoted to a position where they had to follow the pathways of the Western civilization in the last several centuries.

However, there is another point which perplexes me very much that the sheer ignorance of many westerners (some very well-educated ones, like late Carl Sagan) who possess absolutely no knowledge of the contributions made by Muslim scholars and scientists to science and technology over many centuries. Some mention a lengthy discontinuity of the evolution of science between the Ancient Greek civilization and the European Renaissance and Enlightenment, i.e. 600 AD - 1600 AD. According to them, science did not develop in this intermission, which happens to last one millennium. The Greek civilization fell acutely from its climax and came to an end about 600 AD, but Islamic civilization embarked right afterwards. Between 750 AD - 1500 AD, Muslim scholars and scientists contributed to humanity in many ways. They translated ancient Greek texts to Arabic and Persian, exercised this knowledge and made their own substantial original contributions. Therefore, Europeans had a chance to rediscover the ancient Greek texts.

To give a few examples: [1] Avicenna "Ibni Sina" (981-1037) is known as the father of the modern medicine. His books "The Canon of Medicine" were used as textbooks in European universities until the 18th century. He was also a prominent philosopher. He was considered one of the most brilliant scientists of all time. [2] Al-Khwarizmi (770-840) is known as the founder of the modern algebra, and the word "algorithm" is derived from his name. [3] Omar Khayyam (1148-1123) was a famous mathematician, chemist, astronomer and poet. [4] Alhazen "Ibn al-Haitham" (965-1040) was the founder of the modern optics and the author of "Kitab al-Manazir" (Book of Optics). Furthermore, Al-Kindi, Jabir ibn-Hayyan, Al-Battani, Al-Razi, Al-Farabi, Al-Masudi, Alboacen "Al-Mawardi", Al-Biruni, Al-Ghazali, Ibn Rushd, Sharafeddin Tusi, Jalaladdin Rumi, Al-Baitar, Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Battuta, Ulugh Beg etc. were only several of the hundreds of well-known scientists, scholars, philosophers, poets.

Moreover, some Muslim-led nations in the Middle Ages, e.g. Al-Andalus (in Iberia) made myriads of noteworthy contributions to humanity. Until the early 11th century, the city of Cordoba had been a thriving focal point of scholarly activities. The wealth of this civilization at its zenith is described by Maria Rosa Menocal as follows: "...The rich web of attitudes about culture, and the intellectual opulence that is symbolized, is perhaps only suggested by the caliphal library of (by one count) some four hundred thousand volumes, and this is at a time when the largest library in Christian Europe probably held no more than four hundred manuscripts. Cordoba's caliphal library was itself one of seventy libraries in a city that apparently so adored books that a report of the time indicated that there were seventy copyists in the book market who worked exclusively on copying Korans. In one of the dozens of pages he devoted to Cordoba, the historian Edward Gibbons describes the book worship of the Islamic polity he so admired (and found incomparably superior to what he saw as the anti-book culture of medieval Christianity) using a somewhat different measure: the catalogues alone of the Cordoba library ran to forty-four volumes, and these contained the librarians' information on some six hundred thousand volumes. Islam was indeed a clerisy: its privileged elite were the religious lawyers who studied the sacred texts and the scribes and bureaucrats who staffed the royal chanceries. But beyond that considerable segment of the population, these libraries were monuments of a culture that treasured the Word, built by rulers who had the resources to enshrine it...". Needles to say that there were no printing machines or tools in the 9th and 10th centuries. Christian Gutenberg's great-great-great-grandparents had not even been born back then. In addition to the aforementioned colossal library, there were nine hundred baths, tens of thousands of shops, thousands of mosques, running water from aqueducts, paved and well-lit streets, and some seventy other branch libraries. The city of Cordoba was a center of science, scholarship, literature, commerce and obviously civilization in the sense that the members of different religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism), cultures and languages could coexist peacefully and harmoniously, exchange ideas and wisdom and learn from each other. The significance of an advanced irrigation and sewerage system is undeniably crucial. When Andalusians were enjoying the fruits of advanced technology, Europeans were living under miserable conditions, especially common people. Owing to lack of irrigation, restrooms, baths and sewerage, people were suffering from various kinds of diseases and epidemics extensively. Thousands, even millions were dying due to outbreak of contagious diseases (e.g. the plagues).

Overall, science is the product of all humanity regardless of the contributors’ religion, nationality, ethnicity, race, language etc., and the most important problems Muslims facing today are lack of education and poverty. The former leads to poor scientific and technological products and innovations and to some extent religious and political extremism; and the latter makes Muslims focus on more rudimentary problems like how to earn decent sustenance rather than scientific endeavors. Coupled with lack of education and poverty, suppressive regimes thrust large masses into agonizing economic, political and emotional frustrations, which are conducive to potential extreme attitudes, hence defames Islam quite unfairly. Once Muslims have overcome these aforementioned obstacles, scientific and technological advancements will follow in no time. Backwardness has nothing to do with Islam in essence. What human beings need is open and friendly dialog, mutual respect and understanding, scholarly and intellectual interaction and cooperation, a strong sense of sympathy, empathy, love and peace!

Peace to all!

The first verse of Koran (Islam’s holy text) revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was “Read (Iqra').
I am totaly disagree that the muslim countries are not progressing in science because of Islam. The main reason is that muslims are not following Islam in the true sense. If muslims follow Islam as it should be, they will progress in science and will show the new light to the whole humanity.
There are many nations in the world which are underdeveloped and not dominated by muslims. Its an amazing fact that the media is concentating too much on the Islam and most of them are trying to stigmatize Islam.

Sir,
I realise the publications of Turkey is the highest and increased more than 10 fold in less then 10 years, according to your DATA GAP section (which also has a mistake in the corresponding graph for Turkey line). This is very interesting but I do not see that Nature realised it: otherwise I would expect from Nature a more detailed analysis of such an interesting phenomenon....

This is a touchy topic for Muslims and i would rather not comment on this but I kinda have to. I am a researcher who orginally came from a third-world "islamic" country and who is just begining to rub shoulders with the "research elite" (if there is anything like that). The education system in most third world islamic countries is, quite frankly, very bad e.g. i had to "unlearn" most of the values and attitudes they ingrained in me before i could start making any progress.

My stance on this discussion would rather be that lets not try to figure out if the hen came first or the egg i.e. if Islam has any direct implications on education & research or is it the followers who are doing things wrong. That discussion is irrelevant and would only generate a heated defense from muslims who would like to justify that there is nothing wrong with Islam (and I am sure that it's true).

What I would like to point out here is that whenever anyone tries to talk about the economic, social, or educational problems of Islamic countries - muslims take it as an "attack" on their religion and try to justify things. If we look at Europe, it's amazing to see that so many different countries with different languages, different cultures and goverment policies (e.g. Germany, Netherlands, France etc) which are so physically close to each other developed independantly of each other. They all got it "right" and are all part of the "first world" and they all did it in their own unique ways. So if we are to look at hard facts alone then why is there a corelation between being an islamic country and being part of the third world? why are the two terms "islamic country" and "third world country" almost interchangeable? Why cant we find even ONE example of a developed islamic state? Again, i am NOT implying that there is ANYTHING wrong with Islam. What i am trying to bring to light is that at the very least ADMIT that there is a problem. There is nothing wrong with admitting to mistakes, and realizing your own mistakes is one of the first steps towards self-improvement.

So what are these mistakes? In my (humble) view, its not the religious aspects of these socities which hinder growth but rather the cultural ones or the religious misinterpretations which got embroid in the culture. For pointing out all such cultural problems I would probably have to write a thesis on it and when (and if) i would write one i believe that we would find that most of the cultural problems would be closely linked to religious concepts and that is where the situation becomes tricky and i would reserve my comments on that (i don't want any hate mail). In summary, the thing to take away from this writing would be a) Yes, there are problems b) No, there is nothing wrong with religion c) It's the culture, try to work hard on clarifying whats religion and whats culture and then try to remove the cultural evils which hinder progress.

I congratulate Nature for discovering an associative relation between Islam and lack of scientific progress, however associative studies can be misinterpreted by ignorant observers. Scientific progress goes hand in hand with economic development, the latter which is lacking in Islam for various internal as well as political reasons. Will we see a Nature issue devoted to scientific performance or lack thereof in Africa?
The few examples given of actual impedence to scientific progress (third party in vitro fertilization in Saudi Arabia for example) can also be found in secular Christian countries which ban cloning and stem cell research on religious grounds.
Technological ignorance in moslem countries is actually beneficial to the West, as illustrated by the West's refusal to share nuclear technoogy with Islamic countries.
Perhaps this also explains the problems facing researchers in moslem countries: a lack of willingness of Western nations to collaborate scientfically with them. Science is an important resource that needs to be shared. Perhaps researchers in restrictuve Western countries should set up laboratories using embryonic technology in moslem countries.

As the rise of modern western science is inversely correlated to the influence of the christian church, it must at least be considered that religon itself is the primary obstacle to scientific progress. If this is so, its not looking good for the muslim world. How are athiests treated in muslim countries? Not very well, I suspect. Anyway, I recommend the western approach, take the political power out of the hands of the religous elites and encourage freedom of thought.

To
The Editors
Nature Publishing Group

Congratulations on your starting a series on Religion and Science, with the November 2, 2006 special: Islam and Science.

Personally, I would have begun the series with Christianity and Science, given the “most populous” status of that religion .

Even so. Can we now look forward to a full series on: Christianity and Science, Hinduism and Science, Buddhism and Science, Secularism and Science; and then , of course, Judaism and Sikhism, respectively , and Science ?

Of course, eventually, the various other significant religious viewpoints would also have to be covered, vis a vis their influences/status on Science.

Given that political and economic points of view are held to with as much fervour as those of Religion, one wonders whether Nature will follow up with specials on Capitalism and Science, Communism and Science, Socialism and Science, Democracy and Science and Monarchy and Science?

[Editor's note: please note that our Islam package does not mark the beginning of our relgion and science coverage - pls see http://www.nature.com/news/infocus/religionandscience.html for all our previous news on this topic.]

The reasons of downfall of science in Islamic countries are mentioned by authors, criticizing Dr. Haroon Rashid, and Prof. Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman, and ISLAM. I should add here what kind of contributions are done by these author/s who are muslims and by Prof. Dr. Pervaiz Hoodbhoy to the country atleast? These analyses are based on biased thinkings. The author/s should not say *Islamic Thoughts*, but to say the thinkings of a group or of a people. Why these authors; trying to make happy west either to get their own benefits (?); criticizing Islam? Why these authors do not look advancements in other fields and only criticize the minor restrictions imposed by the governments on either transplantation or stem cell embryo. What are the reasons when non-muslim countries have imposed ban in their countries on various research activities; were these Islamists?
Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan and some universities (example, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat, Pakistan) have signed various agreements with foreign institutions for collaborative research; do these institutes have mistrust on muslims? as author mentioned in article on page 1. Downfall of science in muslim countries is not Islam nor Islamic thoughts but social, cultural, educational, and economic reasons.
In addition, what kind of schools of throughts of researchers were invited to the conference on Islam and Science. This is also debatable how many numbers of scientists were invited; from where? either muslims working in non muslim countries or from muslim states with secular thoughts? NWFP part of Pakistan is considered to be the Islamist government; did they make ban on any scientific research work? No and never.

I am doing my PhD in Japan, here i have noticed one thing i.e people in Japan believe in hard work. Hard work means doing to one's full potential or sometime more than that. But back home in Pakistan many of my muslim brothers and sisters expect a lot from God instead of doing to their full potential. Thats why Japan is so much developed and we can only dream to be developed. But doing nothing and expecting a lot is totally against islamic teachings. Islam itself believe in hard word work. So its basically not islam but most of the people living in Pakistan itself are not letting science grow. Also back home many politicians exploit people in the name of God and nationalism. I still remeber my grand father voted for a religious party only because the symbol of the party was book and my grandfather took it for being Quran. But with a leader like General Pervez Musharraf, who let Dr Atta- ur-Rehman to do his best to let science grow and people benefit, we have every reason to progress in the field of science so its only up to us (Pakistani people ) to let the change come to them, which was not there with the previous Goverments.

Several scientists in islamic word think that we can advance science If we go back to Islam and if we follow the great scientists in the gold age of Muslims.
I do not chare this view, because for me science is refutation. The biggest advances in sciences were done by destroying old theories. Science is freedom, courage, and perteptuel refutation. Religion, in which there is no place for refutation, must be kept far from sciences unless we accept to apply scientific methodology to understand religion.

I am an Iranian researcher. I read your articles, "Science and Islam", in "Nature". First of all, I would like to appreciate your increasing attention to the scientific developments which is going on in Islamic countries, like mine. I do not know much about other Islamic countries, but it might be possible for me to point out some reasons for the growth of science in my own country.

I think, the main reason is that, we have good scientific infrastructures, in which our scientist and students can work and do their research, like their counterparts in developed countries. Interestingly, most of these infrastructures have been made or remade after the 1979 revolution.

Second, we are a very young country; more than 70% of our population is below 30. Suffice to say that every year more than 1.5 million students prepare themselves for entrance examination of university. Although in recent years, most of the top-ranked Iranian scientist and students have left the country for a better scientific and daily life in the west, but with the rest, who are still in Iran, we have been able to steadily improve the scientific indicators in most of the fields. Hopefully one day those who are abroad will join us to accelerate this situation.

Third, we are not the ones, who have never been used to the scientific activities in their past. Although within the last 5 centuries, we did not contribute a lot in the rebirth of science, but before that one can easily find the trace of scientific discoveries and inventions of Iranians in Physics, chemistry, mathematics, physiology and so on and so forth. In recent years we have just found ourselves.

Finally, I think the religion is not a barrier or obstacle for any development. The main problem is our incorrect attitude of religion and its relationship with science.

Thanks.

Religion is invariably treated as a matter of faith without the need for substantiation and justification. Science, on the other hand, is rational knowledge based on experimental findings, observed facts and logical analysis. Science is, therefore, readily acceptable to the masses while religion remains a blind ideology. It is also an open secret that there is concerted effort from the scientific community to denigrate religion and ridicule the belief in God. Big bang cosmology suggested a beginning for the universe which irked many scientists as it implied a divine intervention for creation of the universe. This led to many attempts to develop theories that would avoid the possibility of a beginning for the universe. Steady state theory is one such proposal. In 1963 two Russian scientists, Evangenii Lifshitz and Isaac Khalatnikov, also made another attempt with the same motive. The theory of organic evolution on the lines of Darwinian concepts also belongs to this category as it tries to avoid the role for God by suggesting that organisms evolve through chance mutation and natural selection. As Ernst Haeckel stated: “Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection revolutionised biology. The implication of this postulated struggle for existence seemed to undermine the basis of religion…no miracle, no creation, no creator”. The controversy over the theory of evolution is getting worsened by the day with the Christian creationist groups (including the supporters of intelligent design movement) stepping up their fight against it. This has led to strong counter stand taken by the scientific community. Scientific community conscientiously maintains the distinction between science and religion. A resolution passed by the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., in 1981 states: “Religion and science are separate and mutually exclusive realms of human thought whose presentation in the same context leads to misunderstanding of both scientific theory and religious belief.” Nature wrote an editorial apprehending the growing influence of the Intelligent Design movement in schools and universities in the U.S. and Europe: “This is bad news for researchers. Unlike 'creation science', which uses the Bible as its guide, intelligent design tries to use scientific methods to find evidence of God in nature. This approach makes it less theologically heavy-handed than its predecessor, but it also poses a threat to the very core of scientific reason.” The Bible does not give logical support to contradict the evolutionary theory. Nevertheless, Christian opposition to Darwin’s model of origin of species helps to restrict the entry of pseudoscientific theories into the realm of science. The evolutionists continue to chant two things; one evolution is a fact and two, evolutionary theory has been scientifically proved. But no evolutionists has indicated the key papers that proved the theory.
The ongoing debate and controversies between religious leaders and scientists also convey a misleading message that religion is antithesis of science or vice versa. Such views are in total conflict with Islam. The holy Quran reveals to us, the source of knowledge is Allah. “It is He Who taught man that he did not know” (Q. 96:5). Knowledge, both scientific and spiritual (the Quran), comes from Allah. The Quran offers ample guidance for developing a holistic knowledge cutting across both science and religion. The Quranic revelations about the creation of man, divine purpose of human creation, testing of human beings by Allah, recording of human activities, satanic influence on man, the divine mechanism of creation, life-after, divine governance of the universe, etc, can be explained through the analogy of a computerized set-up (for details see The Computer Universe: A Scientific Rendering of the Holy Quran, Adam Publishers, New Delhi, India, 2006). The universe is a computer system designed and programmed by Allah. The phenomenon of life has so far eluded definition. “Gene” and “species” also remain as elusive as life itself. One wonders how biology can proceed in the right direction without understanding these phenomena. A significant outcome of the Quran-science dialogue is that the phenomena of life and death, artificial life, genetic program, and species can be scientifically defined.
It is believed that DNA is the gene and hence blueprint of life. With the crowning of this molecule (the protein synthesis apparatus) as the gene, problems started surfacing. A physical gene has never been the perception of the early geneticists. The particulate gene concept and hence the genome concept have miserably failed (see The Great Gene Fiasco: The Quran Defines Life, Adam Publishers, New Delhi, India, 2006). Life can only be understood in conjunction with the Quranic revelations. Life is where science meets the religion and the phenomenon is the solid proof of God’s existence
The need of the hour is to develop Islamic Science that combines both domains of knowledge, the Quran and science, given by Allah. This approach alone can provide true knowledge of the living and nonliving components of the universe, origin and fate of the universe, and more importantly the purpose of human life on this planet.

I am a catholic but I have great respect for the Islam religion. While christianity is very ideal, Islam is very very practical from my own observation and perception. Science may be both ideal and practical. Everything is a product of so many factors and what we perceive now may not really be the truth or the true picture. Anyway,progress in science can be explained in many ways not only on the basis of the structures and many articles that you read because I believe Islam means peace and nothing more!

It is hard to believe that science, which by definition, requires and promotes objectivity and fairness, can thrive or even progress in nations that function on the basis of a religion (Islam) that absolutely does not treat women as equals to men. Countries traditionally at the scientific forefront have also achieved the greatest equality between the sexes.

“Islam and Science”?? I rather write “Religion and Science” I Guess that religions have nothing to do with science, both are necessary, they have different functions, but they don’t accept the principles of each other. Don’t tell me that when a doctor looks for a medicine for his patients he returns to a holy book. In Islam you can’t draw God or His Prophet (P.B.U.H.), because faith is in the soul, while, in science you use different tools of drawings, laboratories and experiments on rats, plants and humans. If you don’t make any scientific activity without permission from a religious authority you will never advance, whether you were Christian or Muslim. Therefore I recommend that Religious Authorities leave Scientists work without any intervention, because when they disturb the mission of the scientists they spoil the plan of God to provide a better world and prosperous human civilization.

Some comments noted that the first verses of the Koran instruct its followers to "read". This is true but may be misleading. The full verses say
96:1 Read: In the name of thy Lord Who createth, What was man created from?
96:2 Createth man from a clot.
96:3 Read: And thy Lord is the Most Bounteous,
96:4 Who teacheth by the pen,
96:5 Teacheth man that which he knew not.
96:6 Nay, but verily man is rebellious
96:7 That he thinketh himself independent!
These verses seem to instruct the followers to read the words of the Lord, rather than reading in general.

We have specific statements on the summary on Islam and Science and an article by Ehsan Masood, as Islamic Pakistani stakeholders. There is nothing wrong with basic laws mentioned in Quran. Islam is the most modern and progressive religion, it is the Muslim leaders who failed to deliver. For example, in Pakistan not much was invested in higher education and research for almost 50 years, though there was some focus on atomic research that too due to rivalry with India. Even the International organizations funds were not judiciously used to increase literacy rate. Major chunk of such grants are used by high salaries of international experts and sometimes the programmes are rolled back due to geo-political compulsions.
Social sciences in Islamic countries are never stopped until and unless they violate the social, cultural, ethical and political norms, and legal rules and regulations. Ethical guidelines of genetic engineering including recommendations are presented by Islamic Fiqha Academy (IFA), affiliated to World Muslim League (WML), in its 15th session, took place on 31 October, 1998. If one looks at the following recommendations, it will be observed that this religion never bars scientists from research:
OIC is also making efforts to promote education and science in Muslim countries. 15th Science Conference on Higher Education Excellence for Development in the Islamic world was held in Ankara Turkey from 7th to 9th November, 2006. The Secretary General of OIC mentioned the role the task to elevate 20 OIC Universities in the rank of Top 500 World Universities and to bring back the glory of the Muslim community in the field of science and technology and the commitment of the OIC Member States to allocate 1.4% of their GDP for Research and Development.
We all must address the real root causes of down fall, rather blaming others. It should not be only for Muslims but for all oppressed. Root cause analysis shows that:
• It is not Islam that forbids its followers to do good science but it is the priorities of the rulers that contributed to the dismal conditions in Islamic countries.
• Islam encourages to do research and allocating resources for science is obeying Allah Almighty in real sense.
• We need to have a character building campaign among our younger lot, as we are too selfish, we think about ourselves rather we should think about humanity. While some of so called progressive people while following western culture, neither could adopt that culture nor Islamic culture, as a result they lost their own culture in a way.
• The developed countries too need to change their policies towards Muslims. They should not suppress them but to help them equally as they do with non Muslims. Their grants must be utilized on the communities rather than hiring high salaried staff.
• The perception of common men about Islam needs to be changed. The reality is that Islam is the most modern and practical religion close to nature and science. It has lessons about all aspects of life based on science and logic. The dilemma is that scientists have left religion for Islamic scholars only and vice and versa.
• Some of the Muslim dictators are hypocrites; they are interested in gaining powers. For this they follow anybody when they are under pressure, be it the religious fundamentalists or western power.
• Though there is sharp increase of resources in some of the Muslim countries but major share of these resources are being utilized by some institutes only and not many local scientists are allowed to use these facilities.

When I read the comment Posted by Syed Abdullah Gilani and his group, I find a misleading expressions, I read “It should not be only for Muslims but for all oppressed” I want to tell the truth about this issue that neither all oppressed are Muslims nor all Muslims are oppressed, and there isn’t any relation between these two concepts, and if existed, it should be like this (Islam divides the oppressed people which weakens their cause relating it to unjustified religious differences instead of justified demands).

Then I read: “While some of so called progressive people while following western culture, neither could adopt that culture nor Islamic culture, as a result they lost their own culture in a way” As an answer to this part I tell Mr Gilani that the progressive people are not following anyone, they want to use the information and the tools of knowledge in general to create a better life, without intimidation. They give to the human brain the opportunity to decide, they have developed their conscience of the consequences and that makes the difference between the progressive people and the fundamentalist.
Then I read: “The reality is that Islam is the most modern and practical religion close to nature and science” In fact I hate to read that or to say that about my relig