Skip to main content

Is public life metaphysics-free?

If in the past our scholars wrestled with the Jahmites, Jabarites, Mu’tazilites, Sufusta’iyyun, it is thought that modern science today poses a greater challenge to belief than these now defunct sects. Less acknowledged however, is the philosophical bases that constitute modern science which are often the culprit, not the accumulation of empirical data itself, for this by itself is a legitimate pursuit. But rarely are these facts acquired through sense-perception left as raw materials. On the contrary, the organization of these into a coherent whole and the arrival at conclusions themselves presuppose a philosophical framework. It is this philosophical framework that determines what to be studied, what methodology to use and the fundamental assumptions concerning the subject matter, be it nature, man, society or the metaphysical realms. Often they are suppressed and adopted as a valid starting point, with hardly any scrutiny being made as to their veracity. More insidious though, is the unbridled faith and dogma towards this approach that allowed for its infiltration into other disciplines, particularly by what is now designated as the ‘social sciences’.

The uncritical emulation of the so-called ‘scientific method’ has meant that the so-called ‘scientific’ claims are often taken as conclusive and definitive proposition concerning reality, even to the point of formulating comprehensive philosophies that purport to explain things in their essential and fundamental nature. Immanuel Kant’s skepticism on the possibility of metaphysics and the subordination of reason to the senses have meant that only the fragmentary data acquired by the latter through observation and experimentation have any solid credentials. This paradigm has been influential even beyond the ‘natural sciences’ so that even the ‘social sciences’ typically take as conclusive any assertion regarding reality, truth and man as presented by the former, and build their intellectual edifice based on that presumption. But such empirical observations, as Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas explained, can only yield knowledge about factual occurrences (waqi’), which relate to only parts of reality, not of reality (haqiqah) itself, which is holistic and relates to the totality of things. Naturally when the foundations are shaky, so too, will be the entire structure. But is these sciences that form the basis on which ‘public’ sphere is constructed, including the law-making processes and the formulation of public policies.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Conscience of the Market

When we say that the market should be restrained by ethical norms we don’t by default mean that the state should carry that responsibility. Critics typically take as axiomatic that the market is the root of all evil that any instance of irregularity, deficiency or oppressive practices that occur in commercial contexts is taken to warrant immediate outside intervention; and by that is often meant the state. Such an assumption about the market seriously underestimates the possibility of the market itself in restraining its own excesses. The misplaced emphasis on developing measures external to the market to rectify the latter’s shortcomings has only the result of treating the symptom rather than the real disease.

Al-Attas on 'Islamic civilization'

Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas’s definition of ‘Islamic civilization’: “I define Islamic civilization as a civilization that emerges among the diversity of cultures of Muslim peoples of the world as a result of the permeation of the basic elements of the religion of Islam which those peoples have caused to emerge from within themselves. The process by which such emergence comes about is called Islamization, which is the liberation first from magical, mythical, animistic and ethnic cultural tradition incompatible with Islam, and then from secular control over one’s reason and one’s language. Whatever basic and praiseworthy elements of the pre-Islamic civilization that bind people together and are accepted as compatible with Islam become part of Islamic civilization. It is a living civilization whose pulse describes a process of Islamization, not in the dialectical sense of an evolutionary ‘development’, but in the sense of a progress involving every generation of Muslim towards r...

Liberalism's flaw - the 'contingency' of freedom

One serious error in liberal articulation of freedom and human rights lies in its contingent theory of freedom. That is to say, liberalism posits freedom as the absence of state intrusion into the private lives of individuals: freedom is contingent on such omission by the state, barring which the individual is denied his freedom. At its basic and most fundamental level, it is a recognition that the state has the ability to undermine the freedom of the individual. The state is thus unduly given the power to decide and determine the freedom of the individual. This is grotesquely false for freedom is ultimately secured deep within the soul and it is so powerful that no one save God is able to take it away from the individual. In conceiving of freedom in the socio-political sense, liberal philosophers have practically mutilated it and truncated it beyond recognition such that ‘freedom’ is now given an exclusively narrow and limited province, robbing it off the vastness and richness that ...