Zygon 46 (4):793-805 (2011)
|Abstract||Abstract The aim of this paper is to attain a philosophical evaluation of the ideas of the French author Maurice Bucaille. Bucaille formulated an influential discourse regarding the divinity of the Qur’an, which he tried to demonstrate through a comparison of some of its verses with what he defined as scientific data. With his works, which encompass a criticism of the Bible and a defense of creationism, Bucaille furthered the idea that Islam is in harmony with natural sciences, and ensured himself long-lasting fame in the Muslim world. Such ideas have found numerous followers and the description of the “scientific miracles” of the Qur’an has turned into a popular genre. Several attempts have been made to criticize Bucaille about specific positions he holds. The thesis I develop here is that, even if Bucaille's work cannot be easily dismissed, a severe methodological shortcoming emerges through the analysis of the logic behind his claims regarding miraculous and supernatural events. Current attempts at defending the harmony between Islam and science should therefore credit Bucaille, but at the same time, be aware of the risk of inheriting his methodological flaws. In the first section, I briefly recall the works of Bucaille and his contribution to the debate on the harmony between Islam and science. In the second section, I reconstruct Bucaille's view of science and his analysis of the sacred scriptures. In the third section, I investigate how Bucaille characterizes the concept of supernatural. In the fourth section, I put forth a general evaluation of his reasoning|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Stefano Bigliardi (2012). Barbour's Typologies and the Contemporary Debate on Islam and Science. Zygon 47 (3):501-519.
Asgharali Engineer (2011). The Prophet of Non-Violence: Spirit of Peace, Compassion & Universality in Islam. Vitasta Pub..
Reed Richter (2002). What Science Can and Cannot Say: The Problems with Methodological Naturalism. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 22 (Jan-Apr 2002):18-22.
Nidhal Guessoum (2012). Issues and Agendas of Islam and Science. Zygon 47 (2):367-387.
Andrew Aberdein (2003). Balderdash and Chicanery: Science and Beyond. In James South (ed.), Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Philosophy: Fear and Trembling in Sunnydale. Open Court.
Maarten Boudry, Stefaan Blancke & Johan Braeckman (2010). How Not to Attack Intelligent Design Creationism: Philosophical Misconceptions About Methodological Naturalism. [REVIEW] Foundations of Science 15 (3):227-244.
Margaret A. Boden (1969). Miracles and Scientific Explanation. Ratio 11:137 - 144.
Nidhal Guessoum (2008). The Qur'an, Science, and the (Related) Contemporary Muslim Discourse. Zygon 43 (2):411-431.
Nathalia L. Gjersoe & Bruce M. Hood (2006). The Supernatural Guilt Trip Does Not Take Us Far Enough. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (5):473-474.
Charles Stinson (1973). The Finite Supernatural: Theological Perspectives. Religious Studies 9 (3):325 - 337.
Peter Slezak (2011). Review of Maurice A. Finocchiaro: Defending Copernicus and Galileo: Critical Reasoning in the Two Affairs. [REVIEW] Science and Education 20 (1):71-81.
Steve Clarke (2009). Naturalism, Science and the Supernatural. Sophia 48 (2):127-142.
S. Muhammad-Taqīy Mudarrisī (2011). Augustinian Science: Alvin Plantinga’s Idea on Philosophizing and Scientific Theorizing Based on Religious Belief. Dissertation, Mofid University
Added to index2011-11-25
Total downloads5 ( #169,941 of 722,783 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,783 )
How can I increase my downloads?