An Analytical Assessment of the Scientific Information in the Quran

Abstract
The aim of the paper to try and approach the putative scientific information in the Quran in an analytically productive way, with an eye to serving as a toolkit for constructing an exhaustive analysis of such information. To do so, the question of relevance needs to be first addressed: what are the reasons for which a Muslim apologist would, or should, be interested about scientific information in the Quran? I suggest two such avenues of interest, and then try and provide some broad guidelines for research in each of these avenues. The aim of this paper, then, is more general than the title might suggest. Details concerning specific instances of scientific information of the Quran have, for the most part, been avoided. Instead, much of this essays content would focus on the more general, methodical aspects. This essay, then, is not an exposition of the scientific information of the Quran itself, but a guide to approaching them analytically. This in turn, I hope, will lead to the formation of an exhaustive, unbiased, authoritative analysis of the scientific information of the Quran. This does not necessarily mean this essay will focus on constructing an argument from Quranic prescience. While that will form part of the discussion, the aim of the essay is, as I said, analysis. If honest and thorough analysis results in one conceding that the argument from Qurans scientific prescience is flawed, then so be it.

Why is it needed?
One easily understands why a case for scientific prescience would be of value to the Muslims, but as I just said, the essays aim is broader than that. If the analysis does not lead us to an argument for the truth of Islam, what good is it? Notice we are merely talking about the sociological value of such a project to the Muslim community, as opposed to its merit in the discussions of apologetics. In other words, this brief section glances through the lens of the regular Muslim, not the apologist. The scientific miracles hype has more than often led passionate Muslims into making embarassingly bad arguments for Islam. Now this is dangerous in at least two ways.

The first danger is concerned with the faith of the individual beleiver. Many people base their faith on these arguments, only to later discover how weak they are. This often leads to a severe depression in faith. Secondly, when non-Muslims see how bad these arguments turn out to be, this really hurts the cause of dawah. Even if these dangers were somehow waived, this project is needed for a much more fundamental purpose. As Muslims, we should not place our loyalty to the argument that sells the best, but rather to the deliverances of scripture and reason. The idea is not merely to

promote Islam, but to promote it for the right reasons. Fallacious arguments, mishandling of
scriptural or scientific facts run contrary to this. The issue becomes really serious when misintepretation of scripture is involved, since then it spills over to potential violations of creed (adopting an unorthodox methodology of exegesis, for example). Since much of the society, Muslim and non-Muslim, has been exposed to this discussion, it is now incumbent upon us Muslims to present an honest portrayal of the issue. And that is the key reason why such an analysis is needed, rather- overdue. Hopefully this essay will pave the way for that.

In what ways is it important for apologists?

Scientific information in the Quran is significant for the apologists in at least two ways. 1. Constructing a case for scientific prescience in the Quran or more colloquially, the argument from scientific miracles. 2. Defending the Quran against charges of scientific errors. What follows are some general thoughts and guidelines for any relevant research. a) Instead of treating each scientific fact on its own (for either of the two purposes), it would be more productive to lump relevant scientific information together under a broad banner, and then dissect each lump individually. Here are some examples: (i) Evolution (as opposed to individual facts concerning Adams creation) (ii) Cosmology (iii) Embryology, etc. Each of the above three examples come with a considerable amount of data to consider, pose a set of problems, require explanations with a salient featurecommonality of theme, and, upon analysis, produce output of substantial significance (e.g. the Quran is compatible with evolution, or Quranic embryology is free from Jewish or Hellenic influences). This seems like a nice way to split the entire project

of scientific information in the Quran into sizable packets, each with a common theme. This is of further strategic importance to the researcher, for example- in treating more than one issue as a lump and working on it, she would have to focus on a wider array of information- which would give her a firm grasp on the topic. b) Scriptural exegesis should be done independent of our background knowledge concerning relevant scientific facts. This is one of the most popular errors done in this field. Especially when we are trying to establish a case for scientific prescience, honest exegesis is an absolute prerequisite. It does not mean that exegesis would always yield very definite interpretations- it may as well yield ambiguous and flexible ones. In these cases, the duty of the honest researcher is to do no more than to state: the

scripture is open to variable interpretations on this issue. The overall rationale behind
this is obvious. If we are trying to construct a case for scientific prescience in the Quran, then reading scientific facts into it as a part of exegesis would constitute circular reasoning. c) The term honest exegesis entails a lot, and I do not plan to cover all of the issues here. While scriptural context and linguistic issues are at least sometimes talked about, one thing that is often absent from the table is: how, if at all, the Quranic scientific injunctions were historically understood. To understand why this is important, consider the fact that some cosmological facts mentioned in the Quran (heavens and earth being one at one point, the seven heavens being placed one above the other) were found in Qurans literary mileu. Now these commonalities are relevant to the discussion in at least the following way: defending the Quran against charges of plagiarism, or at least drawing from (incorrect) information available in its social context. As a matter of fact, a friend of mine pointed out that almost no scientific fact can be discussed in isolation of its historical understanding. It is a good thing that this fact has been admitted by some Muslim apologists in the context of embryological information in the Quran in that they took it upon themselves to try and explain the ostensible similarities between Quran and Gallenic medical accounts.

How would an argument from prescience work?

Say the Quran contains scientific information X. On the basis of this fact, how can we construct an argument from Quranic prescience? In other words, what makes the Qurans containing scientific information X a miraculous fact? This extremely, extremely crucial question is gone almost largely unattended in popular treatments of the topic. Most treatments simply leap from Quran contains scientific information

X to the Quran is miraculous without explaining the hidden premises inbetween, while other treatments appeal to subjective standards which are not really of much value in an intellectual exchange. As an example, it is often stated that the Qurans containing scientific information X is miraculous in that it is inimitable- no one else could have done it. While the overall idea is close to a definition of a miracle, it is still too coarse and does not offer much conviction by way of argument. In this context, let us remind ourselves what a miracle means. A miracle is an event which cannot be explained in terms of the natural causes relevant to that time and place. For example, splitting the Red Sea by striking it with a staff cannot be explained by any of the natural causes present at that time and place- be it waves, air current, force of the staff, whatever. It is, quite simply, beyond nature. So for any event to pass of as miraculous, one would need to demonstrate what is it about that event which could not have been explained by the relevant natural causes. For any argument from Quranic prescience to succeed, then, one would need to demonstrate that the Qurans mentioning scientific fact X could not have been explained by the relevant natural causes (Chance? Prior discovery? Any other alternative?). So in short, making a case for Quranic scientific prescience concerns the following exercises: 1. An honest exegesis, keeping in mind the scriptural, linguistic and historical context. 2. Demonstrating that the honest exegesis accurately and unambiguously mentions the scientific fact prior to its discovery. 3. Demonstrating that such a feat could not have been achieved by natural causes like chance or prior discovery. I made this point in my brief review of Hamza Tzortzis paper on embryology. The review can be accessed here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/113698570/Comments-on-Tzortzis-Paper Read under 4. The essay does not really have an argument.

Conclusion
I believe many of the arguments made by Muslims lack in intellectual strength because Muslims judge their arguments from the Muslim lens i.e. with a high receptivity. Quite frequently they unknowingly bring some background knowledge to this judgment (e.g. belief that the Quran is Gods word). With that assumption built into the argument, it is small

wonder why the arguments end up being weak. Now of course I am not suggesting that an apologist needs to leave his religion behind in order to pursue his research interests, but in the formulation of an argument- which is supposed to convince the non-believer (that is what an argument means)- one should be cautious not to incorporate his personal beliefs into the premises of the argument itself.