BOG vs NAUKA
- statix
- Posts: 2961
- Joined: 27/08/2009 09:04
- Location: Sarajevo
#1426 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Bolje bi mu bilo da se prihvati naucnog metoda, kojem su kako ti je VHF pokazao temelje udarili islamski ucenjaci (uglavnom on koji su se bavili prirodnim naukama) i time pokusa objasniti odnose medju fizickim pojavama i prirodne fenomene, nego sto tefsira naokolo i zatupljuje narod. Moras shvatiti da odgovore koje pokusava TE dati ne mogu se dobiti tefsirom. Ako malo bolje pogledas, svi ti primjeri (naucne tvrdnje u Kuranu) koje navodis zapravo su dokaz da nisu tefsirom razotkriveni ti fenomeni nego naucnim metodom, a tek onda, oni koji se bave time, pokusavaju naci odgovarajuci ajet. Znam da tebi tefsir dodje kao revizija za naucna otkrica, ali ko ti garantuje da je ona ispravna... 
-
Bušman
- Posts: 2146
- Joined: 08/04/2008 08:48
#1427 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Nope, Demokrit. Islamska kultura je sacuvala ucenja anticke Grcke i to je njena zasluga.statix wrote:Bolje bi mu bilo da se prihvati naucnog metoda, kojem su kako ti je VHF pokazao temelje udarili islamski ucenjaci
Racionalno koliko i teorija o nastanku civilizacije u okolini Visokog, BIH prije nekih 20-ak hiljada godina. Yahya naucnik koliko i ovaj koji je izmislio prethodno pomenutu teorijucarobnjak_iz_voza wrote:Dok god neko ne ponudi precizniji tefsir ,ja nemam
nista protiv ovoga racionalnog koji je ponudio Jahja jer tradicionalni ne nudi nista osim pukog prijevoda spornih pojava u Kur'anu,a kad se dodje do novih puteva i saznanja ,opet nemam nista protiv da postojeca dopunimo ,jer i tefsir je nauka.
P.S a mozda te i ne razumijem jer ponekad koristis previse perfektnih fraza
-
VerticalHairFactor
- Posts: 739
- Joined: 26/04/2010 18:17
- Location: Under Wraps
#1428 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Nope, Demokrit je utemeljio teoriju o "atomskoj prirodi Univerzuma" - a sam je u svojim putešestvijima hvalio egipatske matematičare. I, nope, islamska kultura je preuzela svu tradiciju svih velikih civilizacija od ranije, ne samo grčke - to je malo pretenciozno i egocentrično, i pomalo nalik na ove koji zagovaraju "superiornost svojih" - sačuvala je, i dala svoj autentični doprinos.Nope, Demokrit. Islamska kultura je sacuvala ucenja anticke Grcke i to je njena zasluga.
Algoritam, algebra, trigonometrija, astrolab, evolutivni pristup na makro i mikro planu, te posebice utemeljenje TE gotovo istovjetno Darvinu, predstavljaju poprilično prominentne i autentične momente te iste kulture.
Tvoja izjava je netačna u onoj mjeri u kojoj bi bila netačna izjava nekoga ko kaže da su Evropljani renesansu doživjeli zahvaljujući utjecaju Andalusije (što je dobrim dijelom tačno) te su samo sačuvali vali taj autentični "islamski pristup i duh" (što je netačno u svojoj isključivosti). Zapravo je istina da je naučni proces konstanta u ljudskom rodu, nije ekskluzivitet ni grčke, ni perzijske, ni islamske ni zapadne kulture - nego se pomjerao "tamo - vamo", a ljudi koji imaju probleme su kreirali mit o superiornosti "svojih", i umanjivali vrijednost onih "drugih".
Ili su Grci skontali i "nulu", a ne tamo neka inferiorna "njihova civilizacija, koja je samo očuvala grčku", pa sada mi za cifru kažemo cifra, a u superiornom Englishu se koristi zero - a sve od arapskog sifr, iliti praznina, nula, kako je to lijepo izdefinirao Al Khawarizmi daleke 976. I mada su još Babilonci razmišljali o 0, Grci je odbacili jer "ništa ne može biti nešto", Indijci su je prihvatili kao "nešto", a u praktičnu matematičku upotrebu je uveli ti "plagijatiori koji su samo očuvali grčku kulturu, i ništa nisu drugo uradili".
Ljudski rod je jedno, i ljudsko pregalaštvo je zajednička stvar - umanjivati bilo čiju ulogu je besmisleno, i dovodi svakoga ko to radi u istu ravan sa bilo kojim fanatikom bilo koje provenijencije, neminovno.
-
VerticalHairFactor
- Posts: 739
- Joined: 26/04/2010 18:17
- Location: Under Wraps
#1429 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
A, ako sa druge strane tvrdiš da Eš'ari nije naučnik, te da upravo ovaj vodeći teolog nije natjerao da se u pitanjima prirode čovjek smije rukovoditi samo empirijskim postulatima, i to zbog vjerskih razloga
- što i jeste razlog sve ove rasprave - tada pročitaj tekst dolje, izvini na engleskom je, i copy past je; ali ovo je portal za razgovor pa će nam s progledati kroz prste:
From the 12th century onwards, Islamic astronomy began becoming a science primarily dependant upon observation rather than philosophy, primarily due to religious opposition from Islamic theologians of the Ash'ari school, most prominently Al-Ghazali, who opposed the interference of Aristotelian physics and Aristotelian cosmology in astronomy, opening up possibilities for an astronomy unrestrained by Aristotelian philosophy. For example, the Ash'ari doctrine influenced the theologian Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (1149–1209) to reject the Aristotelian notion of the Earth's centrality within the universe and instead propose the notion of a multiverse consisting of countless worlds and universes, "such that each one of those worlds be bigger and more massive than this world as well as having the like of what this world has." Al-Razi also criticized the Aristotelian notion of solid celestial spheres and suggested these may be "merely the abstract orbit traced by the stars." Later in the century, the Islamic theologian Adud al-Din al-Iji (1281–1355), under the influence of the Ash'ari doctrine of occasionalism, which maintained that all physical effects were caused directly by God's will, rejected the Aristotelian principle of an innate principle of circular motion in the heavenly bodies, and maintained that the celestial spheres were "imaginary things" and "more tenuous than a spider's web". Under such influences, Ali Qushji (d. 1474) rejected Aristotelian physics and completely separated it from astronomy, allowing astronomy to become a purely empirical and mathematical science. This allowed him to explore alternatives to the Aristotelian notion of a stationery Earth, as he explored the idea of a moving Earth. He concluded, on the basis of empirical evidence rather than speculative philosophy, that the moving Earth theory is just as likely to be true as the stationary Earth theory and that it is not possible to empirically deduce which theory is true.
Historičar razvoja islamske nauke, a posebice astronomije, Donald Routledge Hill promućurno dijeli razvoj naučne misli u islamskom svijetu na 4 perioda:
1- Sinkretizacija i asimilacija sasanidsko-iranske, indijske i grčke astronomije i nauke u arapsko-islamsku (700-825);
2- Period intezivnog istraživanja, prihvaćanja a zatim modifikacije Ptolemejevog sistema (825 - 1025);
3 - Procvat neovisnog i prepoznatljivog islamskog astronomskog modela (1025 - 1450)
4 - Ograničeni doprinosi i na kraju stagnacija (1450 - 1900); baš kada se kreacionizam počeo javljati u islamskom svijetu, a eš'arijski empirijski model napušten.
From the 12th century onwards, Islamic astronomy began becoming a science primarily dependant upon observation rather than philosophy, primarily due to religious opposition from Islamic theologians of the Ash'ari school, most prominently Al-Ghazali, who opposed the interference of Aristotelian physics and Aristotelian cosmology in astronomy, opening up possibilities for an astronomy unrestrained by Aristotelian philosophy. For example, the Ash'ari doctrine influenced the theologian Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (1149–1209) to reject the Aristotelian notion of the Earth's centrality within the universe and instead propose the notion of a multiverse consisting of countless worlds and universes, "such that each one of those worlds be bigger and more massive than this world as well as having the like of what this world has." Al-Razi also criticized the Aristotelian notion of solid celestial spheres and suggested these may be "merely the abstract orbit traced by the stars." Later in the century, the Islamic theologian Adud al-Din al-Iji (1281–1355), under the influence of the Ash'ari doctrine of occasionalism, which maintained that all physical effects were caused directly by God's will, rejected the Aristotelian principle of an innate principle of circular motion in the heavenly bodies, and maintained that the celestial spheres were "imaginary things" and "more tenuous than a spider's web". Under such influences, Ali Qushji (d. 1474) rejected Aristotelian physics and completely separated it from astronomy, allowing astronomy to become a purely empirical and mathematical science. This allowed him to explore alternatives to the Aristotelian notion of a stationery Earth, as he explored the idea of a moving Earth. He concluded, on the basis of empirical evidence rather than speculative philosophy, that the moving Earth theory is just as likely to be true as the stationary Earth theory and that it is not possible to empirically deduce which theory is true.
Historičar razvoja islamske nauke, a posebice astronomije, Donald Routledge Hill promućurno dijeli razvoj naučne misli u islamskom svijetu na 4 perioda:
1- Sinkretizacija i asimilacija sasanidsko-iranske, indijske i grčke astronomije i nauke u arapsko-islamsku (700-825);
2- Period intezivnog istraživanja, prihvaćanja a zatim modifikacije Ptolemejevog sistema (825 - 1025);
3 - Procvat neovisnog i prepoznatljivog islamskog astronomskog modela (1025 - 1450)
4 - Ograničeni doprinosi i na kraju stagnacija (1450 - 1900); baš kada se kreacionizam počeo javljati u islamskom svijetu, a eš'arijski empirijski model napušten.
-
VerticalHairFactor
- Posts: 739
- Joined: 26/04/2010 18:17
- Location: Under Wraps
#1430 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Evo još nekih jedinstvenih ideja, imanentnijih današnjem vremenu, a koji jasno pokazuju da je naučna misao u "islamskoj kulturi" bila živa i progresivna:
In the 9th century, the eldest Banū Mūsā brother, Ja'far Muhammad ibn Mūsā ibn Shākir, made significant contributions to astrophysics and celestial mechanics. He was the first to hypothesize that the heavenly bodies and celestial spheres are subject to the same laws of physics as Earth, unlike the ancients who believed that the celestial spheres followed their own set of physical laws different from that of Earth. In the 10th century, Muhammad ibn Jābir al-Harrānī al-Battānī (Albatenius) (853–929) introduced the idea of testing "past observations by means of new ones". This led to the use of exacting empirical observations and experimental techniques by Muslim astronomers from the 11th century onwards. - Ranije je spomenuto da ih ja na razdvajanje između filozofije i nauke "natjerao" Ebul-Hasan El-Eš'ari, te da je zbog "božije uzročnosti" zagovarao da se zakoni moraju dokazati da bi se znala njihova stvarnost.
In the early 11th century, Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen) wrote the Maqala fi daw al-qamar (On the Light of the Moon) some time before 1021. This was the first attempt successful at combining mathematical astronomy with physics and the earliest attempt at applying the experimental method to astronomy and astrophysics. He disproved the universally held opinion that the moon reflects sunlight like a mirror and correctly concluded that it "emits light from those portions of its surface which the sun's light strikes." In order to prove that "light is emitted from every point of the moon's illuminated surface," he built an "ingenious experimental device." Ibn al-Haytham had "formulated a clear conception of the relationship between an ideal mathematical model and the complex of observable phenomena; in particular, he was the first to make a systematic use of the method of varying the experimental conditions in a constant and uniform manner, in an experiment showing that the intensity of the light-spot formed by the projection of the moonlight through two small apertures onto a screen diminishes constantly as one of the apertures is gradually blocked up."
Ibn al-Haytham, in his Book of Optics (1021), also maintained that the celestial spheres do not consist of solid matter, and that the heavens are less dense than the air. These views were later repeated by Witelo and had a significant influence on the Copernican and Tychonic systems of astronomy.
Ibn al-Haytham also refuted Aristotle's view on the Milky Way galaxy. Aristotle believed the Milky Way to be caused by "the ignition of the fiery exhalation of some stars which were large, numerous and close together" and that the "ignition takes place in the upper part of the atmosphere, in the region of the world which is continuous with the heavenly motions." Ibn al-Haytham refuted this by making the first attempt at observing and measuring the Milky Way's parallax, and he thus "determined that because the Milky Way had no parallax, it was very remote from the earth and did not belong to the atmosphere."
Also in the early 11th century, Abū Rayhān al-Bīrūnī introduced the experimental method into astronomy and was the first to conduct elaborate experiments related to astronomical phenomena. He discovered the Milky Way galaxy to be a collection of numerous nebulous stars. In Afghanistan, he observed and described the solar eclipse on April 8, 1019, and the lunar eclipse on September 17, 1019, in detail, and gave the exact latitudes of the stars during the lunar eclipse.
Dakle "utemeljenje empirijskog metoda" JESTE zasluga islamskog zlatnog doba - što ne znači da se istovjetna ideja nije javljala i ranije, ali je u ovom okružju imala status neke vrste OBAVEZE, zbog prevalentnog vjerskog tumačenja, kojeg "nominalno" i danas slijede većina muslimana - eš'arijskog.
In the 9th century, the eldest Banū Mūsā brother, Ja'far Muhammad ibn Mūsā ibn Shākir, made significant contributions to astrophysics and celestial mechanics. He was the first to hypothesize that the heavenly bodies and celestial spheres are subject to the same laws of physics as Earth, unlike the ancients who believed that the celestial spheres followed their own set of physical laws different from that of Earth. In the 10th century, Muhammad ibn Jābir al-Harrānī al-Battānī (Albatenius) (853–929) introduced the idea of testing "past observations by means of new ones". This led to the use of exacting empirical observations and experimental techniques by Muslim astronomers from the 11th century onwards. - Ranije je spomenuto da ih ja na razdvajanje između filozofije i nauke "natjerao" Ebul-Hasan El-Eš'ari, te da je zbog "božije uzročnosti" zagovarao da se zakoni moraju dokazati da bi se znala njihova stvarnost.
In the early 11th century, Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen) wrote the Maqala fi daw al-qamar (On the Light of the Moon) some time before 1021. This was the first attempt successful at combining mathematical astronomy with physics and the earliest attempt at applying the experimental method to astronomy and astrophysics. He disproved the universally held opinion that the moon reflects sunlight like a mirror and correctly concluded that it "emits light from those portions of its surface which the sun's light strikes." In order to prove that "light is emitted from every point of the moon's illuminated surface," he built an "ingenious experimental device." Ibn al-Haytham had "formulated a clear conception of the relationship between an ideal mathematical model and the complex of observable phenomena; in particular, he was the first to make a systematic use of the method of varying the experimental conditions in a constant and uniform manner, in an experiment showing that the intensity of the light-spot formed by the projection of the moonlight through two small apertures onto a screen diminishes constantly as one of the apertures is gradually blocked up."
Ibn al-Haytham, in his Book of Optics (1021), also maintained that the celestial spheres do not consist of solid matter, and that the heavens are less dense than the air. These views were later repeated by Witelo and had a significant influence on the Copernican and Tychonic systems of astronomy.
Ibn al-Haytham also refuted Aristotle's view on the Milky Way galaxy. Aristotle believed the Milky Way to be caused by "the ignition of the fiery exhalation of some stars which were large, numerous and close together" and that the "ignition takes place in the upper part of the atmosphere, in the region of the world which is continuous with the heavenly motions." Ibn al-Haytham refuted this by making the first attempt at observing and measuring the Milky Way's parallax, and he thus "determined that because the Milky Way had no parallax, it was very remote from the earth and did not belong to the atmosphere."
Also in the early 11th century, Abū Rayhān al-Bīrūnī introduced the experimental method into astronomy and was the first to conduct elaborate experiments related to astronomical phenomena. He discovered the Milky Way galaxy to be a collection of numerous nebulous stars. In Afghanistan, he observed and described the solar eclipse on April 8, 1019, and the lunar eclipse on September 17, 1019, in detail, and gave the exact latitudes of the stars during the lunar eclipse.
Dakle "utemeljenje empirijskog metoda" JESTE zasluga islamskog zlatnog doba - što ne znači da se istovjetna ideja nije javljala i ranije, ali je u ovom okružju imala status neke vrste OBAVEZE, zbog prevalentnog vjerskog tumačenja, kojeg "nominalno" i danas slijede većina muslimana - eš'arijskog.
-
VerticalHairFactor
- Posts: 739
- Joined: 26/04/2010 18:17
- Location: Under Wraps
#1431 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Kojim su se principima vodili islamski učenjaci prvog doba, i zašto (vidjeti boldano):
n astrophysics and celestial mechanics, Abū Rayhān al-Bīrūnī described the Earth's gravitation as:
"The attraction of all things towards the centre of the earth."
Al-Biruni also discovered that gravity exists within the heavenly bodies and celestial spheres, and he criticized the Aristotelian views of them not having any levity or gravity and of circular motion being an innate property of the heavenly bodies.
Also in the 12th century, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi participated in the debate among Islamic scholars over whether the celestial spheres or orbits (falak) are "to be considered as real, concrete physical bodies" or "merely the abstract circles in the heavens traced out year in and year out by the various stars and planets." He points out that many astronomers prefer to see them as solid spheres "on which the stars turn," while others, such as the Islamic scholar Dahhak, view the celestial sphere as "not a body but merely the abstract orbit traced by the stars." Al-Razi himself remains "undecided as to which celestial models, concrete or abstract, most conform with external reality," and notes that "there is no way to ascertain the characteristics of the heavens," whether by "observable" evidence or by authority (al-khabar) of "divine revelation or prophetic traditions." He concludes that "astronomical models, whatever their utility or lack thereof for ordering the heavens, are not founded on sound rational proofs, and so no intellectual commitment can be made to them insofar as description and explanation of celestial realities are concerned."
n astrophysics and celestial mechanics, Abū Rayhān al-Bīrūnī described the Earth's gravitation as:
"The attraction of all things towards the centre of the earth."
Al-Biruni also discovered that gravity exists within the heavenly bodies and celestial spheres, and he criticized the Aristotelian views of them not having any levity or gravity and of circular motion being an innate property of the heavenly bodies.
Also in the 12th century, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi participated in the debate among Islamic scholars over whether the celestial spheres or orbits (falak) are "to be considered as real, concrete physical bodies" or "merely the abstract circles in the heavens traced out year in and year out by the various stars and planets." He points out that many astronomers prefer to see them as solid spheres "on which the stars turn," while others, such as the Islamic scholar Dahhak, view the celestial sphere as "not a body but merely the abstract orbit traced by the stars." Al-Razi himself remains "undecided as to which celestial models, concrete or abstract, most conform with external reality," and notes that "there is no way to ascertain the characteristics of the heavens," whether by "observable" evidence or by authority (al-khabar) of "divine revelation or prophetic traditions." He concludes that "astronomical models, whatever their utility or lack thereof for ordering the heavens, are not founded on sound rational proofs, and so no intellectual commitment can be made to them insofar as description and explanation of celestial realities are concerned."
-
Bušman
- Posts: 2146
- Joined: 08/04/2008 08:48
#1432 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Demokrit je otac moderne nauke. U tom kontekstu sam ga spomenuo, jer mi se ucinilo kao da se govori da su Arapi izmislili nauku. Nauka je postojala i prije njega, ali on je postavio vrlo vazne temelje na kojima moderna nauka pociva.VerticalHairFactor wrote:Nope, Demokrit je utemeljio teoriju o "atomskoj prirodi Univerzuma" - a sam je u svojim putešestvijima hvalio egipatske matematičare. I, nope, islamska kultura je preuzela svu tradiciju svih velikih civilizacija od ranije, ne samo grčke - to je malo pretenciozno i egocentrično, i pomalo nalik na ove koji zagovaraju "superiornost svojih" - sačuvala je, i dala svoj autentični doprinos.Nope, Demokrit. Islamska kultura je sacuvala ucenja anticke Grcke i to je njena zasluga.
Algoritam, algebra, trigonometrija, astrolab, evolutivni pristup na makro i mikro planu, te posebice utemeljenje TE gotovo istovjetno Darvinu, predstavljaju poprilično prominentne i autentične momente te iste kulture.
Tvoja izjava je netačna u onoj mjeri u kojoj bi bila netačna izjava nekoga ko kaže da su Evropljani renesansu doživjeli zahvaljujući utjecaju Andalusije (što je dobrim dijelom tačno) te su samo sačuvali vali taj autentični "islamski pristup i duh" (što je netačno u svojoj isključivosti). Zapravo je istina da je naučni proces konstanta u ljudskom rodu, nije ekskluzivitet ni grčke, ni perzijske, ni islamske ni zapadne kulture - nego se pomjerao "tamo - vamo", a ljudi koji imaju probleme su kreirali mit o superiornosti "svojih", i umanjivali vrijednost onih "drugih".
Ili su Grci skontali i "nulu", a ne tamo neka inferiorna "njihova civilizacija, koja je samo očuvala grčku", pa sada mi za cifru kažemo cifra, a u superiornom Englishu se koristi zero - a sve od arapskog sifr, iliti praznina, nula, kako je to lijepo izdefinirao Al Khawarizmi daleke 976. I mada su još Babilonci razmišljali o 0, Grci je odbacili jer "ništa ne može biti nešto", Indijci su je prihvatili kao "nešto", a u praktičnu matematičku upotrebu je uveli ti "plagijatiori koji su samo očuvali grčku kulturu, i ništa nisu drugo uradili".
Ljudski rod je jedno, i ljudsko pregalaštvo je zajednička stvar - umanjivati bilo čiju ulogu je besmisleno, i dovodi svakoga ko to radi u istu ravan sa bilo kojim fanatikom bilo koje provenijencije, neminovno.
Ni na kraj pameti mi nije reci da Arapi nisu razvijali naslijedjeno znanje. Ipak su oni u doba evropskog mraka razvijali sve segmente nauke, od astronomije do medicine. Uopce nisam rekao da su plagijatori, samo kazem da su sacuvali grcku kulturu od zaborava.
-
VerticalHairFactor
- Posts: 739
- Joined: 26/04/2010 18:17
- Location: Under Wraps
#1433 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Helem, u želji da potvrdim kako je nauka "živo biće" unutar ljudskog roda, razlog zbog kojeg je neispravno reći da su muslimani samo sačuvali grčku znanost - pored svih prethodno navedenih primjera jedinstvenih dostignuća na polju astronomije, zoologije, TE, itd. - najvažnija razlika između islamskih učenjaka i grčkih filozofa ogledala se u EMPIRIJSKOJ METODI, koju su jednoglasno usvojili kao "pravi put" unutar islamskog naučnog backgrounda. Uvijek je astronomija ta koja je najprominentnija, jer zajedno sa matematikom i fizikom odražava ljudski pogled na "sve". Odatle je ranije spomenuta Maraga škola nadošla na sljedeće:
Unlike the ancient Greek and Hellenistic astronomers who were not concerned with the coherence between the mathematical and physical principles of a planetary theory, Islamic astronomers insisted on the need to match the mathematics with the real world surrounding them, which gradually evolved from a reality based on Aristotelian physics to one based on an empirical and mathematical physics after the work of Ibn al-Shatir. The Maragha Revolution was thus characterized by a shift away from the philosophical foundations of Aristotelian cosmology and Ptolemaic astronomy and towards a greater emphasis on the empirical observation and mathematization of astronomy and of nature in general, as exemplified in the works of Ibn al-Shatir, Qushji, al-Birjandi and al-Khafri.
Ibn al-Shatir's model for the appearances of Mercury, showing the multiplication of epicycles using the Tusi-couple, thus eliminating the Ptolemaic eccentrics and equant.
Other achievements of the Maragha school include the first empirical observational evidence for the Earth's rotation on its axis by Tusi and Qushji, the separation of natural philosophy from astronomy by Ibn al-Shatir and Qushji, the rejection of the Ptolemaic model on empirical rather than philosophical grounds by Ibn al-Shatir, and the development of a non-Ptolemaic model by Ibn al-Shatir that was mathematically identical to the heliocentric Copernical model.
Unlike the ancient Greek and Hellenistic astronomers who were not concerned with the coherence between the mathematical and physical principles of a planetary theory, Islamic astronomers insisted on the need to match the mathematics with the real world surrounding them, which gradually evolved from a reality based on Aristotelian physics to one based on an empirical and mathematical physics after the work of Ibn al-Shatir. The Maragha Revolution was thus characterized by a shift away from the philosophical foundations of Aristotelian cosmology and Ptolemaic astronomy and towards a greater emphasis on the empirical observation and mathematization of astronomy and of nature in general, as exemplified in the works of Ibn al-Shatir, Qushji, al-Birjandi and al-Khafri.
Ibn al-Shatir's model for the appearances of Mercury, showing the multiplication of epicycles using the Tusi-couple, thus eliminating the Ptolemaic eccentrics and equant.
Other achievements of the Maragha school include the first empirical observational evidence for the Earth's rotation on its axis by Tusi and Qushji, the separation of natural philosophy from astronomy by Ibn al-Shatir and Qushji, the rejection of the Ptolemaic model on empirical rather than philosophical grounds by Ibn al-Shatir, and the development of a non-Ptolemaic model by Ibn al-Shatir that was mathematically identical to the heliocentric Copernical model.
-
VerticalHairFactor
- Posts: 739
- Joined: 26/04/2010 18:17
- Location: Under Wraps
#1434 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
OK, drug Bušman, bit će da sam te pogrešno shvatio.
Demokrit jeste uticao na poznatog teologa El-Eš'arija, koji je opet bio i polimat (stara priča tog vremena) i koji je zagovarao "atomski ustroj Univerzuma", odatle je Razi, citirajući Kur'an, nadošao na ideju o multiverzumu. Pa kaže:
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (1149–1209), in dealing with his conception of physics and the physical world in his Matalib, discusses Islamic cosmology and astronomy. He criticizes the idea of the Earth's centrality within the universe and "explores the notion of the existence of a multiverse in the context of his commentary" on the Qur'anic verse, "All praise belongs to God, Lord of the Worlds." He raises the question of whether the term "worlds" in this verse refers to "multiple worlds within this single universe or cosmos, or to many other universes or a multiverse beyond this known universe." In volume 4 of the Matalib, Al-Razi states:
"It is established by evidence that there exists beyond the world a void without a terminal limit (khala' la nihayata laha), and it is established as well by evidence that God Most High has power over all contingent beings (al-mumkinat). Therefore He the Most High has the power (qadir) to create a thousand thousand worlds (alfa alfi 'awalim) beyond this world such that each one of those worlds be bigger and more massive than this world as well as having the like of what this world has of the throne (al-arsh), the chair (al-kursiyy), the heavens (al-samawat) and the earth (al-ard), and the sun (al-shams) and the moon (al-qamar). The arguments of the philosophers (dala'il al-falasifah) for establishing that the world is one are weak, flimsy arguments founded upon feeble premises.
Al-Razi rejected the Aristotelian and Avicennian view of the impossibility of multiple worlds or universes. He describes the main Aristotelian arguments against the existence of multiple worlds or universes, pointing out their weaknesses and refuting them. This rejection arose from his affirmation of atomism, as advocated by the Ash'ari school of Islamic theology, which entails the existence of vacant space in which the atoms move, combine and separate. He discussed more on the issue of the void in greater detail in volume 5 of the Matalib. He argued that God has the power to fill the vacuum with an infinite number of universes.
Vrlo je znimljivo kako su rani islamski teolozi slobodno razastirali ideje o kojima i mi danas govorimo, te su ih potom obavezno podvrgavali empirijskom metodu, u skladu sa tadašnjim mogućnostima. Zanimljivo je da su današnji teolozi - iako nominalno tvrde da slijede ovu najveću sunijsku školu (eš'arijsku) - na apsolutno suprotstavljenom fonu ovim prvotnim, koji se smatraju relevantnim i klasičnim u smislu autentične islamske misli.
Demokrit jeste uticao na poznatog teologa El-Eš'arija, koji je opet bio i polimat (stara priča tog vremena) i koji je zagovarao "atomski ustroj Univerzuma", odatle je Razi, citirajući Kur'an, nadošao na ideju o multiverzumu. Pa kaže:
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (1149–1209), in dealing with his conception of physics and the physical world in his Matalib, discusses Islamic cosmology and astronomy. He criticizes the idea of the Earth's centrality within the universe and "explores the notion of the existence of a multiverse in the context of his commentary" on the Qur'anic verse, "All praise belongs to God, Lord of the Worlds." He raises the question of whether the term "worlds" in this verse refers to "multiple worlds within this single universe or cosmos, or to many other universes or a multiverse beyond this known universe." In volume 4 of the Matalib, Al-Razi states:
"It is established by evidence that there exists beyond the world a void without a terminal limit (khala' la nihayata laha), and it is established as well by evidence that God Most High has power over all contingent beings (al-mumkinat). Therefore He the Most High has the power (qadir) to create a thousand thousand worlds (alfa alfi 'awalim) beyond this world such that each one of those worlds be bigger and more massive than this world as well as having the like of what this world has of the throne (al-arsh), the chair (al-kursiyy), the heavens (al-samawat) and the earth (al-ard), and the sun (al-shams) and the moon (al-qamar). The arguments of the philosophers (dala'il al-falasifah) for establishing that the world is one are weak, flimsy arguments founded upon feeble premises.
Al-Razi rejected the Aristotelian and Avicennian view of the impossibility of multiple worlds or universes. He describes the main Aristotelian arguments against the existence of multiple worlds or universes, pointing out their weaknesses and refuting them. This rejection arose from his affirmation of atomism, as advocated by the Ash'ari school of Islamic theology, which entails the existence of vacant space in which the atoms move, combine and separate. He discussed more on the issue of the void in greater detail in volume 5 of the Matalib. He argued that God has the power to fill the vacuum with an infinite number of universes.
Vrlo je znimljivo kako su rani islamski teolozi slobodno razastirali ideje o kojima i mi danas govorimo, te su ih potom obavezno podvrgavali empirijskom metodu, u skladu sa tadašnjim mogućnostima. Zanimljivo je da su današnji teolozi - iako nominalno tvrde da slijede ovu najveću sunijsku školu (eš'arijsku) - na apsolutno suprotstavljenom fonu ovim prvotnim, koji se smatraju relevantnim i klasičnim u smislu autentične islamske misli.
-
VerticalHairFactor
- Posts: 739
- Joined: 26/04/2010 18:17
- Location: Under Wraps
#1435 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Dakle, ako ćemo biti iskreni - a mislim da sam postao jako, jako zanimljive informacije - klasični islamski mislioci su; vidi ti ironije; ZBOG VJERSKOG IMPERATIVA usvojili empirijski model kao jedini ispravan u pogledu spoznaje svega što je oko nas. Oni nisu sporili Boga, ali su zbog "božije uzročnosti" i ajeta koji govore o "nepromjenjivim Božijim zakonima" zaključili da moraju odbaciti helenistički filozofski pristup objašnjavanju svega, te da pored "logike i filozofije" Božiji zakoni smiju biti utvrđeni isključivo empirijskim metodom. Kao što je to ranije spomenuto prvi je tu ideju snažno zagovarao osnivač dominantne sunijske teološke škole Ebul-Hasan El-Eš'ari, da bi kasniji učenjaci tog dominantnog pravca, poput Gazalija, u vidu snažne islamske vjerske opozicije ultimativno tražili da se "istine o Univerzumu" utvrđuju isključivo empirijskim modelom, nikako aristotelijanskom filozofskom tradicijom - na tragu njegovog snažnog apeliranja u tom smislu, poznati islamski učenjak i polimat Ali Qushji utemeljio je princip u svom djelu "U vezi sa tobožnjom zavisnošću astronomije o filozofiji" kojim je odbacio u potpunosti filozofiju kao osnov u Astronomiji i prirodnim naukama, te ustvrdio da se samo empirijskim metodama može utvrditi stvarnost Univerzuma. Na istom fonu je djelovao Fahrudin Razi, Nasirudin Tusi i drugi.
Na kraju krajeva, Kopernik je u cjelosti preuzeo Tusijev i Qushjijev heliocentrični sistem, s tim da su Mliječni put na tragu Al Birunijevog da je van atmosfere i daleko od svega posmatrali kao nešto daleko i šire u odnosu na taj sistem.
Impresivno, s obzirom na to da danas grupica amatera u liku Haruna Yahye i sličnih ublehaša (i ne znam ko su svi ti tipovi, jer su bezlični i nebitni i za ljudski rod i za taj islamski "kružok", zapravo ih se u tradicionalnom smislu i ne može svrstati tamo) postavljaju vjerovanje u naivne pričice kao "vjerski imperativ".
Ukratko ironija: Al Jahiz, El-Eš'ari, Gazali, Razi, Kušču, Biruni, Ibn-Khaldun, Ibn-Miskevejh, Tusi i drugi, svi klasični islamski mislioci, štaviše teolozi, smatraju VJERSKIM IMPERATIVOM empirijsku metodu i otklon od helenističkog filozofskog pristupa prirodnim naukama da se "ne bi lagalo na Božije zakone".
Ovaj Harun Yahya, beduini koji se nazivaju selefijama i slični smatraju VJERSKIM IMPERATIVOM filozofirati o Božijim zakonima a ne ih utvrđivati empirijskom metodom, te se tako vraćaju par hiljada godina unazad, štaviše iza poslanika Muhameda.
Nemreš vjerovat, hajde neka mi neko kaže da to nije provala milenija!
Na kraju krajeva, Kopernik je u cjelosti preuzeo Tusijev i Qushjijev heliocentrični sistem, s tim da su Mliječni put na tragu Al Birunijevog da je van atmosfere i daleko od svega posmatrali kao nešto daleko i šire u odnosu na taj sistem.
Impresivno, s obzirom na to da danas grupica amatera u liku Haruna Yahye i sličnih ublehaša (i ne znam ko su svi ti tipovi, jer su bezlični i nebitni i za ljudski rod i za taj islamski "kružok", zapravo ih se u tradicionalnom smislu i ne može svrstati tamo) postavljaju vjerovanje u naivne pričice kao "vjerski imperativ".
Ukratko ironija: Al Jahiz, El-Eš'ari, Gazali, Razi, Kušču, Biruni, Ibn-Khaldun, Ibn-Miskevejh, Tusi i drugi, svi klasični islamski mislioci, štaviše teolozi, smatraju VJERSKIM IMPERATIVOM empirijsku metodu i otklon od helenističkog filozofskog pristupa prirodnim naukama da se "ne bi lagalo na Božije zakone".
Ovaj Harun Yahya, beduini koji se nazivaju selefijama i slični smatraju VJERSKIM IMPERATIVOM filozofirati o Božijim zakonima a ne ih utvrđivati empirijskom metodom, te se tako vraćaju par hiljada godina unazad, štaviše iza poslanika Muhameda.
- crnokosa88
- Posts: 134
- Joined: 15/02/2011 09:05
- Location: Kanada
- Contact:
#1436 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
- fatamorgana
- Posts: 26894
- Joined: 16/02/2010 22:35
- Location: došao je tiho i ušao u .... banoviće
#1437 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Pa to je bar lako, laptop je nastao od desktopa!crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
-
Bušman
- Posts: 2146
- Joined: 08/04/2008 08:48
#1438 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
http://www.virtualbox.orgcrnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
- GAU8
- Posts: 9141
- Joined: 05/01/2011 09:18
#1439 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Je li u suprotnosti po pitanju zajednickog pretka majmuna i covjeka?carobnjak_iz_voza wrote:To jednostavno nije tacno,niko ne ide protiv nauke ,pa nauka je imperativ u islamu ali vi to ne zelite cuti jer se isto tako ne uklapa u vase poimanje islama.Niko ne tvrdi da "jedna kap" znaci odmah i citavu naucnu koncepciju oplodnje jajsca ali znaci da to NIJE U SUPROTNOSTI SA NAUKOM jer se govori o "kapi koja se ubaci" a to i jeste tako pa se onda veliki broj spermatozoida utrkuje da bi stigao samo jedan.Vi ne shvatate da se ovdje ne dokazuje nista drugo osim da .Kur'an nije u suprotnosti sa naukom i to ne samo na ovom primjeru nego cemo vidjeti da ih ima na stotine.Ako to nije fascinatno u knjizi od prije 14vijekova onda cemo izbaciti rijec "fascinantno" potpuno iz upotrebe iz rijecnika,lexikona..
- GAU8
- Posts: 9141
- Joined: 05/01/2011 09:18
#1440 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Stvorio svemoguci. To je bar lako.crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
- harač
- Posts: 5273
- Joined: 13/02/2006 13:30
#1441 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
ex nihiloGAU8 wrote:Stvorio svemoguci. To je bar lako.crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
- crnokosa88
- Posts: 134
- Joined: 15/02/2011 09:05
- Location: Kanada
- Contact:
#1442 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
.....crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
I da dodam, rjesenje ne smije ukljuciti covjeka u bilo kojem obliku ili formi.
- dr.Gonzo
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: 11/03/2009 17:08
#1443 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Kakve to veze ima sa bilo cime?Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
Ako ocekujes da ti neko odgovori, bilo bi red da prvo izlozis paralelu koju zelis napraviti. U suprotnom ce se dogoditi ono sto se cesto dogadja: ti postavis pitanje u jednoj recenici, i onda zanemaris ljudi koji ti odgovaraju velikim postovima.
- GAU8
- Posts: 9141
- Joined: 05/01/2011 09:18
#1444 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Kakvo rjesenje, ne kontam, sta je poenta?crnokosa88 wrote:.....crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
I da dodam, rjesenje ne smije ukljuciti covjeka u bilo kojem obliku ili formi.
Ustvari mogu pretpostaviti.
Ne mozemo "rijesiti" tvoju zagonetku ako ne ukljucimo covjeka, i onda ti kazes, eto vidite, tako isto ne mozemo iskljuciti ni kreatora iz price nastanka blablabla.
Poenta je da ge vacina nas uopste ne iskljucuje. Samo sto se ne ogranicavamo kao neki bukvalisti.
Eto, neka je nesto sto mozemo nazvati bog kreiralo univerzum na koji god vec nacin. To opet nece ponistiti zakon gravitacije npr. ili nece zaustaviti ljude da pokusavaju dalje proniknuti u tajne svega.
To isto ne znaci da covjek i ostali primati nemaju zajednickog pretka, na primjer. Bez obzira sto mi pojma nemamo kako je nastala prva molekula RNA/DNA
-
Bušman
- Posts: 2146
- Joined: 08/04/2008 08:48
#1445 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Joj jest lijepo biti neupucen. Sad ti namjerno necu dati linkove ko zadnji put, jer si ih totalno ignorirala.crnokosa88 wrote:.....crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
I da dodam, rjesenje ne smije ukljuciti covjeka u bilo kojem obliku ili formi.
- statix
- Posts: 2961
- Joined: 27/08/2009 09:04
- Location: Sarajevo
#1446 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Ne treba nikome oduzimati zasluge. Naravno da su Stari Grci dali veliki doprinos nauci, ali je i tacno da su puno vise teoretisali i generalizovali tj. spekulisali (npr. Aristotelova fizika), mada su atomiste vise interesovali "pocetni uslovi" od filozofskog teoretisanja i tumacenja odredjenog prirodnog dogadjaja. Takodjer, ne moze se ni reci da je Aristotel samo filozofirao i da mu empirijski metod nije bio poznat, jer slobodni pad je sigurno bio popracen observacijom i eksperimentom, ali covjek nije imao vakumsku pumpu, jebi ga.
Empirijski metod odnosno potreba za observacijom i eksperimentom jeste unaprijedjena od strane Arapa, sto je i za ocekivati, obzirom da su Arapi prevodom grcke literature bili u prilici da unaprijede svoju metodologiju i odnos prema nauci. Evropljanin koji se jezi na Arape ce smatrati Rogera Bacona utemeljiteljom empirijskog metoda, i ignosrisati cinjenicu da je on bio pod snaznim uticajem arapske literature, itd...
U cijeloj toj prici Harun postaje smijesan, obirom da tefsirom obara naucnu teoriju, a nadprirodnim intervencionizmom
objasnjava prirodne pojave.
U cijeloj toj prici Harun postaje smijesan, obirom da tefsirom obara naucnu teoriju, a nadprirodnim intervencionizmom
objasnjava prirodne pojave.
Last edited by statix on 19/04/2011 11:13, edited 1 time in total.
-
Great Cornholio
- Posts: 11713
- Joined: 17/06/2010 23:40
#1447 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Upravo tako, ne možemo isključiti mogućnost postojanja kreatora, ili više njih, možemo jedino suprotstavljati objašnjenja principa kreacije data u vjerskim spisima sa objašnjanjima koja nam je dala nauka.GAU8 wrote:Kakvo rjesenje, ne kontam, sta je poenta?crnokosa88 wrote:.....crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
I da dodam, rjesenje ne smije ukljuciti covjeka u bilo kojem obliku ili formi.
Ustvari mogu pretpostaviti.
Ne mozemo "rijesiti" tvoju zagonetku ako ne ukljucimo covjeka, i onda ti kazes, eto vidite, tako isto ne mozemo iskljuciti ni kreatora iz price nastanka blablabla.
Poenta je da ge vacina nas uopste ne iskljucuje. Samo sto se ne ogranicavamo kao neki bukvalisti.
- JoseMujica
- Posts: 32831
- Joined: 11/01/2011 14:33
- Location: u zagrljaju Vojina Mijatovića
- Grijem se na: malograDŽane
- Vozim: Tuarega
- Horoskop: Poskok
#1448 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
crnokosa88 wrote:Ima li neko da bi probao objasniti nastanak kompjutera u okviru kompjutera?
imam jednu anegdotu....bio tamo 96 na kursu konfjutora u nekom, mislim Kuvajtskom komitetu (fala im od srca bilo džaba) i sad na kraju imamo završni ispit koji drži prof. Nedim Mašić (mislim da se tako zvao) i ide pitanje :
- Zašto je kompjuter glup?
Sad, bilo je i nas mlađe raje, studenata i mi bacamo definicije u okvirima informatike
Kaže profa : NE! Alah je stvorio samo jedno savršeno biće a to je čovjek. Komputer je glup jer ga je napravio čovjek!
Već sam tu bio na ivici da puknem od smijeha, al sam se uspio suzdržati. Ali to nije sve
Ide dalje pitanje:
- Zato je Joystick šejtanska naprava?
Već me samo pitanje skoro pa dotuklo, alo smo se uspjeli suzdržati, samo se sgledati i slegnuti ramenima.
Tačan odgovor je: Zato što služi samo za igranje igrica koje nas odvlače od vjere!
Nema dalje! tu smo pukli
-
Great Cornholio
- Posts: 11713
- Joined: 17/06/2010 23:40
#1449 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
A još ako si ljevak, a znamo da je šejtan ljevakJoseMujica wrote:
- Zato je Joystick šejtanska naprava?
Već me samo pitanje skoro pa dotuklo, alo smo se uspjeli suzdržati, samo se sgledati i slegnuti ramenima.
Tačan odgovor je: Zato što služi samo za igranje igrica koje nas odvlače od vjere!
Nema dalje! tu smo pukli![]()
![]()
-
SiD_Ljuti
- Posts: 17
- Joined: 03/07/2007 22:48
#1450 Re: BOG vs NAUKA
Oliti: "Does God sit on his Arse the whole time?"Moonlight Shadow wrote:Da li Bog ... citavo vrijeme sjedi na Arsu?
Priceless!
