Evidence of the evidence


Presentation Description

No description available.


Presentation Transcript

Slide 1: 

Evidence of the Divine Reflections on Nature & Beyond

Human Curiosity! : 

Human Curiosity! What existed before the beginning of the universe? How did it begin, and why? Why did it take the form it did? Who are we? Where did we come from, and why? Where are we going?

Faith and Reason : 

It is through reason that human justifies faith as rational justification leads to conviction. Rational argument is an intellectual need of every faithful; otherwise, he will not be able to stand firmly on his faith. It is reason, which transforms a blind faith into an intellectual choice through either knowledge or submission (appreciation of the limits of human reason). History shows that human has employed three ways of argument to find a rational ground in favour of faith. These three ways reflect different stages in intellectual development. Faith and Reason


The first way of argument is one, which is based on nature. That is, simple facts or common experiences. Some examples of this kind are found in the Holy Quran. There is one such argument related to Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him). The criterion in in his quest for God was that God is the greatest and ever existing. NATURAL ARGUMENT


This is narrated in the Quran in these words: “And thus We gave Abraham insight into [God's] mighty dominion over the heavens and the earth - and [this] to the end that he might become one of those who are inwardly sure (about faith). So when the night overshadowed him, he saw a star; said he: this is my Lord.  So when it set, he said: I do not love the setting ones. Then when he saw the moon rising he said: this is my Lord?  So when it set, he said: If my Lord would not guided me I would certainly be of the erring people. NATURAL ARGUMENT


Then when he saw the sun rising, he said: this is my Lord?  this is greater.  So when it set, he said: O my people! Surely I am clear of what you associate (with God)” Behold, unto Him who brought into being the heavens and the earth have I turned my face, following my natural upright, and I am not of those who ascribe divinity to aught beside Him" (6:75-79). NATURAL ARGUMENT


This argument commonly known as First Cause may be summed up as follows: The world human observes with his senses must have been brought into being by God as the First Cause. The Philosophers have argued that the observable order of causation is not self-explanatory. It can only be accounted for by the existence of a First Cause. This First Cause, however, must not be considered simply as the First in a series of continuing causes, but rather as the First Cause in the sense of being the cause for the whole series of observable Causes. PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENT

Quantum Indeterminacy!Boundaries of Science & Philosophy : 

Some critics object that the actions or free will of subatomic particles are uncaused; hence, why not also the universe as a whole? The whole science proceeds on the assumption that a reason can be found for why things are as they are, that it is the end of science if one finds an “uncaused” event, or one for which there is no reason at all. The Bohr/Heisenberg thesis that some quantum events occur without a cause seems to count against this claim. Quantum uncertainties are governed by statistical laws. There are rigorous laws of probability which describe quantum events. Quantum Indeterminacy!Boundaries of Science & Philosophy

Quantum Indeterminacy!Boundaries of Science & Philosophy : 

At any moment in time, there is a definite and finite set of possible futures for elementary particles. What Heisenberg claims is that not every event, at the quantum level, is sufficiently caused. There is a certain indeterminacy about quantum processes. Yet the process as a whole is far from random. The laws of probability work so that most indeterminate and therefore unpredictable events cancel out at the macro-molecular level, and leave the highly predictable laws of mechanics intact. Quantum Indeterminacy!Boundaries of Science & Philosophy

Limits of Human Understanding : 

Abstraction: Scientific comprehension is of basic relational elements of the physical structure of the universe, therefore it gives a generalised and abstract picture. Intellect works discursively: That is, it is incapable of intuiting things in one all-embracing experience. It has to consider things one after the other, making connections by inference and extrapolation, and moving from one element to another in succession. A fully comprehensive intellect, like that of God, will understand all things in one intuitive, non-discursive, act, i.e. God knows everything in its full particularity by immediate apprehension. Limits of Human Understanding

Limits of Human Understanding : 

Limited access to knowledge: There is absolutely no way in which we could have Knowledge of worlds and realities other than those in this space-time, for by definition they would have no spatial or temporal relation to us, which rules out all forms of knowledge. And there is no way in which a finite mind can encompass an infinite set of data. Limits of Human Understanding


Religion or faith is related to things like the existence of God, something intangible and unobservable.  Whereas non-religious things like the sun has a tangible and observable existence.  Therefore, it came to be regarded that direct argument is possible for establishing non-religious things, only. Whereas, it is only indirect or inferential argument which can be employed to prove religious propositions. SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT


The discovery of anti-matter, black holes, and dark energy, which have intangible existence, entailed that a scientist could see only the effect of a thing and not the thing itself. Here the scientist felt that direct argument could be applied to the tangible effect but it was not possible at all to apply direct argument on the intangible cause.  The most important of all the changes brought about by this new development in this world of science was that it was admitted in the scientific circles that inferential argument was as valid as direct argument.  That is, if a cause (e.g. God) shows continuous effect (order and complexity in nature), then the existence of this intangible cause will be accepted as a fact just as the existence of tangible effect is accepted as a proved fact. SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT


After reaching this extent of rational argument the difference between religious argument and scientific argument is no longer exists. The Devine intervention is seen in the order and complexity in nature despite the laws of probability (statistical entropy) and the second law of thermodynamics (informational entropy). If the process is totally random, the degree of order that may be build in nature by chance would eventually be destroyed by spontaneous decay. SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT

God claimed in the Holy Quran: “Verily, all things have We created in proportion and measure” [54/49] : 

The balance and precise strength of the fundamental gravitational, electromagnetic and nuclear forces needs to be exactly what it is if conscious life is to exist. So Peter Atkins says: If nuclei were bound together slightly more weakly, or slightly more strongly, the universe would lack chemistry. If the electric force were slightly stronger than it is, evolution would not reach organisms before the sun went out. If it were only slightly less, stars would not have planets, and life would be unknown. Peter Atkins, Creation Revisited, p. 23. God claimed in the Holy Quran: “Verily, all things have We created in proportion and measure” [54/49]

What is the Purpose of Life? : 

What is the Purpose of Life? Who got the Right to answer this question?

authorStream Live Help