Islamic Science, Public Theology, and Legal Rationality
Abstract
In this essay, I aim to explore Islamic science and its critical analysis of the decline of Islamic rationality. I focus on the role of Muslim public theology in advancing the politics of recognition, fostering interreligious dialogue, and offering an alternative vision of modernity and the civil state. The project of public theology is inherently hermeneutical, grounded in a collaborative spirit of interpreting the Qur’an and Islamic law. Additionally, the Christian perspective aligns with the Islamic approach to public issues, particularly in terms of legal authority and natural science, bridging the gap between religious legal authority and scientific achievement.
Islamic Science and Its Critical View of the Decline of Science
In the context of militant Islam, there exists a backward-looking face in radical Islamic politics, which stands in stark contrast to the forward-looking vision of enlightened Islam—an image rooted in hope. According to Mehdi Golshani, an Iranian theoretical physicist and prominent public intellectual, Islam embodies a “Unity of Sciences” that defines its approach to knowledge. This unity asserts that there is no inherent distinction between Islamic sciences and other branches of knowledge, such as the natural and mathematical sciences.
For Golshani, the goal of all sciences is to understand God’s signs, with each discipline reflecting a different dimension of God’s creation. Rather than being isolated from one another, these sciences are interconnected, much like the branches of a tree. This perspective highlights the unity of the Creator and the cohesion of creation as central principles in the Muslim worldview.[1]
Historically, Muslim thinkers did not separate the natural sciences from their religious worldview, seeing both religion and science as complementary avenues for understanding the universe. Scientific work, alongside all other forms of knowledge, was integrated within the broader Islamic worldview. Golshani’s position aligns with the enlightened tradition of Islam, which draws on the intellectual legacies of figures like Avicenna, Averroes, the Nahda (Islamic Renaissance), and modernist reformers.
However, Mehdi Golshani identifies several historical factors that contributed to the decline of scientific reasoning and development in the Islamic world:
- The Mongol and Christian invasions, which destroyed key centers of Islamic civilization, such as Baghdad, along with the impact of the Crusades and the loss of Muslim Spain.
- The conflict between Islam and the natural sciences, particularly the dominance of traditional legal schools and theological conservatism.
- The rise of mysticism and theological orthodoxy, which overshadowed the rational tradition of Muslim philosophy and led to the stifling of independent, critical thinking.[2]
Among these factors, Golshani highlights the rise of the Ash’arite school of theology as the primary cause of the decline in scientific progress. With the ascension of this school, the free exchange of ideas between religious scholars, scientists, and philosophers became severely restricted, and rational thinkers found themselves facing significant limitations.
For the Ash’arites, knowledge was primarily confined to the teachings of the Qur’an and Islamic tradition. They rejected the notion of secondary causes operating autonomously, asserting that only God was the direct cause of all events. This theological perspective, known as occasionalism, holds that God continuously recreates every event in the universe, leaving no inherent causal power to created things.
This rejection of secondary causes, coupled with an emphasis on God’s absolute power and divine intervention, contributed to a decline in the study of the natural sciences. For several centuries, the Ash’arite school dominated Islamic thought, suppressing dissenting views and stifling scientific progress.
The negation of secondary causes led to a significant decline in the study of natural sciences. This position dominated Islamic intellectual life for centuries, suppressing alternative viewpoints and limiting intellectual freedom. For example, Ibn Taymiyyah (1263–1328), a prominent Islamic scholar of the 13th and 14th centuries, strongly rejected the Ash’arite interpretation of God’s attributes in a metaphorical sense. Instead, he advocated for a more literalist understanding of the Qur’an and Hadith, opposing the Ash’arites’ allegorical approach to divine attributes.
Ibn Taymiyyah argued that metaphorical interpretations undermined the clarity and simplicity of the texts and diverted attention from their direct and literal meanings. His position marked a break from the dominant Ash’arite school, challenging both theological orthodoxy and its restrictive view on reason and causality.
As he argues, “The knowledge reached through the prophet (s) is the thing which deserves the name of knowledge. Other teachings are either not beneficial knowledge, even if it is called knowledge. But, if it is a beneficial knowledge, it would have come in the inheritance of the prophet.” [3]
The rise of certain anti-rational schools of thought, which disregarded the Qur’anic emphasis on the study of nature, contributed significantly to the decline of science in the Islamic world. However, most Muslim philosophers and theological schools, even those critical of certain rationalist interpretations, maintained the belief in secondary causes as contingent upon God, the ultimate primary cause. This relationship between secondary and primary causes remained a fundamental principle in Islamic thought, despite ongoing theological debates over the nature of causality.
Islamic Public Theology and Legal Rationality
In response to the violent extremism of radical Islam, Nadirsyah Hosen, a legal scholar at Melbourne Law School, proposes a new model of Islamic public theology that presents Islam as a living, evolving religion. This approach enables Islam to engage with contemporary public issues in pluralistic societies, offering ethical guidance and spiritual insights in an age marked by industrialization, globalization, and digitalization.
Hosen’s public theology involves a comparative study of religions, exploring how different traditions can contribute to public discourse, address shared social challenges, and foster mutual understanding. He critiques the Ash’arite school for its metaphorical interpretation of God’s attributes, advocating for a responsible human relationship with God that avoids fatalism. Al-Ghazali’s influence in popularizing Ash’arism remains significant in contemporary Islamic communities.
Hosen’s evaluation of the Ash’arite school and Al-Ghazali is grounded in Muhammad Abduh’s theology of Tawhid. It is important to note that their doctrine was rationally based on the laws of the universe, requiring believers to accept the certainty of these rational premises and deductions as an obligation. This reasoning was undertaken with the same confidence as the acceptance of religious dogmas, asserting that where proof was lacking, the nonexistence of the object in question could be claimed.
This outlook persisted until the rise of Al-Ghazali, Al-Razi, and others who adopted their positions. Even if one or more proofs were shown to be false, the possibility of the object’s existence remained open, awaiting further substantiation from more adequate evidence. There was no justification for turning the argument into an absolute by focusing solely on the negative instance while excluding other perspectives.[4]
Hosen’s vision of public theology emphasizes collaboration with religious scholars and leaders, advocating for collective ijtihad (independent reasoning) and shura (consultation), both grounded in Qur’anic principles (3:159, 42:38). His approach is hermeneutically rooted in a collective framework, open to learning from perspectives in modernity, socialism, political theology, and liberation theology.[5]
A Constructive Reflection: Recognition and Alternative Path
In the discussion of Islamic science and public theology, I sense that the project of Islamic public theology lacks sufficient engagement with natural science—there is a noticeable gap between legal rationality and scientific reasoning. Legal governance must engage with scientific achievements, influencing the legal domain through rationalization, specialization, and differentiation, particularly in the areas of civil society and human rights. However, theological orthodoxy and legalism, since Al-Ghazali, have acted as impediments to scientific reasoning and philosophical development.
If public theology is to engage more effectively with diverse public spheres, it should examine the extent to which the social-cultural sphere can be stratified according to economic resources, power mechanisms, education, occupation, and gender inequality. This intersection of social complexity should be rationalized, specialized, and differentiated, with each system having its own right to communication. This brings us to the epistemology of public theology, which concerns the religious construction of reality and its rationalization process in relation to civil society, political governance, materials interests, and bureaucracy.
To overcome the legacy of anti-rationalism, it is essential to reinterpret the fundamental Islamic principle of Tawhid (divine oneness) in relation to unity, equality, and popular sovereignty. This re-interpretation should involve a dialectical understanding of the relationship between primary and secondary causes, thus deepening our understanding of divine action and its connection to humanity and the natural world. Public theology, therefore, is not only feasible but constructive, engaging in an ongoing dialogue with civil society and advocating for justice, communicative freedom, and the common good.
Public theology holds promise within both Christianity and Islam, emphasizing the mutual understanding of religion as a covenantal connection between God and humanity. This universal concept should not be overlooked in the comparative study of religions, while also recognizing the diverse anthropological experiences and interpretations of God’s covenantal relationship with humanity, society, and the natural world throughout the broader history of religion.
An Islamic approach to modernity must draw upon a hermeneutical retrieval of religious sources (particularly the Qur’an) and practices, as well as the Islamic cultural Renaissance and philosophical enlightenment (from the 8th to the 13th centuries). This approach should reimagine and reformulate Islamic Hellenism—encompassing metaphysics, philosophy, theology, science, jurisprudence, spirituality, literature, and pedagogy—in a manner that resonates with contemporary modes of thought, while emphasizing tolerance and a politics of recognition.
A politics of recognition shapes the fundamental identity of the Muslim and underscores cultural authenticity, rooted in the Islamic Renaissance, philosophical enlightenment, religious humanism, and modern development. The importance of recognition in this context is premised on the diverse, multicultural public sphere, particularly when addressing issues related to race, gender, and interfaith dialogue.
A shared public theology between Islam and Christianity can be found in the politics of difference (as outlined by John Rawls, particularly in the context of distributive justice), which promotes equal dignity and civil-state governance. When discussing an Islamic state, this concept should address three key areas: religious identity, political independence, and cultural specificity—especially in response to the colonial imposition of Western models.
The concept of an Islamic civil state is founded on democratic consultation (shura), wherein decision-making processes and their authority should be civil in nature and fully recognize the plurality of religions and political ideas. This model stands in contrast to theocratic systems, such as that of Iran, which is governed by a clergy-like apparatus. In a civil society, the state should represent the will of its people through democratic principles, with state affairs based on ijtihad (independent reasoning) and popular sovereignty, rather than solely on Islamic law and jurisprudence (fiqh).
In contrast to the often assumed subordination of civil society to the state, civil society in the West is characterized by a non-ideological apparatus that exists independently of the state. It is defined by various public spheres—such as the economy, culture, education, and religion—that function according to initiatives within civil society. This understanding aligns with the concept of Islamic democratic secularism, which upholds full respect for individuals’ choices.
It envisions a reconfiguration, or even a separation, of the religious and political domains. In this framework, religion cannot serve as a justification for political control or the exercise of state power. Instead, its role is to provide ethical guidance for good governance, ensuring that public affairs are conducted with integrity, justice, and respect for the common good.[6]
For Charles Taylor “with the politics of difference, what we are asked to recognize is the unique identity of this individual or group, their distinctness from everyone else. The idea is that it is precisely this distinctness that has been ignored, glossed over, assimilated to a dominant or majority identity. And this assimilation is the cardinal sin against the ideal of authenticity.”[7]
Léopold Senghor’s political philosophy offers a valuable framework for thinking about the politics of recognition and Islamic authenticity, particularly within the context of a post-colonial, Muslim-majority society like Senegal. Senghor, who served as the first president of Senegal from 1960 to 1980, developed a vision that blended African identity with universal humanist values. His concept of Negritude emphasized the uniqueness of African cultural contributions to humanity while advocating for the dignity and recognition of African heritage in the face of colonial oppression.
Senghor’s insights can also be applied to broader discussions on Islamic identity, modernity, and the relationship between religion and politics. “We cannot achieve true independence and build a modern African nation if we cannot overcome religious differences as well as race differences—if we are not diligent in fostering fruitful cooperation between Muslims and Christians.”[8]
Muhammad al-Talbi, a Tunisian scholar influenced by Muslim thinkers such as al-Ghazali and Muhammad Abduh, made significant contributions to Christian-Muslim relations. “It is not impossible,…to elaborate a theology which would allow for a certain degree of plurality in the ways of salvation, were it only because one cannot forbid Divine Goodness from overflowing, in a gesture of justice, of mercy and of love, beyond the strict limits of any given Church in order to embrace all men of good will who live exemplary lives. In the end God remains entirely and freely the one who judges, and we must abandon ourselves confidently to His Wisdom. In any case we must abstain from passing judgment in His place.”[9]
A genuine sense of recognition and difference in democratic pluralist societies is rooted in the unifying worldview of Tawhid, which emphasizes Divine Goodness expressed through the overflow of mercy and love, as intertwined with justice. This perspective transcends the strict boundaries of any particular religious community or its authorities, highlighting Divine Goodness in embracing all people of good will through exemplary lives.
Given this, public theology advocates for modern thought, independent reasoning (ijtihad), and the creative interpretation of contemporary challenges. It also calls for an immanent critique of social inequalities and advocates for social reform and emancipation in the emergence of new life. The concept of Renaissance in the Muslim context is not based on blind adherence to or uncritical acceptance of traditional authority, prejudices, or obscurities, but instead embraces a forward-looking vision focused on social justice, popular sovereignty, ethical solidarity, scientific development, and the integrity of the lifeworld.
This alternative path critically interacts with and incorporates Western value systems (such as human rights, the common good, and deliberative democracy) into its unfolding, while avoiding the pitfalls of laissez-faire capitalism, social Darwinism, racism, and colonialism. An alternative path to modernity can be formed through the consideration of the multiple encounters of non-Western cultures.
Disregarding non-Western contributions to human dignity, democratic formation, and civilization leads to a failure to recognize how other cultures are grounded in distinct lifeworlds and how this difference crucially conditions the way they integrate and develop the truly universal features of modernity, despite their cultural relativity.[10]
This alternative form of modernity in the context of Islam does not necessarily align with generalizing arguments that reduce complex issues to anecdotal tangents or ideological simplifications. Islam, as a religion (din), is understood within a more intricate reality, encompassing sociological studies of religious discourse, diverse schools of thought, and its elective affinities with material interests, institutional ratification, and power relations.
In the context of cultural Renaissance and philosophical Enlightenment, religious belief systems and social discourse involve independent reasoning, democratic consultation, distributive justice, and a politics of recognition. These elements remain foundational for immanent critique, solidarity, and emancipation, which are crucial for advancing public theology—whether Christian or Islamic.
[1] Medhi Golshani, Science and Religion in a Monotheistic Perspective (Tehran: Safir Ardehal, 2021), 16.
[2] Ibid., 17.
[3] Cited in ibid., 18.
[4] Abdhu, A Theology of Tawhid, 37.
[5] Hosen, N. (2012). “Public theology in Islam: a new approach?” Interface: A Forum for Theology in the World, 15 (1-2), 59-72.
[6] Tariq Ramadan, Islam and the Arab Awakening (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 102-107.
[7] Charles Taylor, “The Politics of Recognition,” in Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition, ed. Amy Gutmann (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994), 38.
[8] Leopold Senghor, Negritude und Humanismus (Dusseldorf/Koln: E. Diederich, 1967), 234. Cited in A History of Christianity in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, 1450-1990: A Documentary Sourcebook, eds. Klaus Koschorke el al. (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2007), 252.
[9] Cited in Hugh Goddard, A History of Christian-Muslim Relations (Chicago: New Amsterdam Books, 2000), 164.
[10] Charles Taylor, “Two Theories of Modernity,” in Alternative Modernities, ed., Dillip P. Gaonkar (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2001), 180.