Monday, June 18, 2012

Reviewing Modernization, Secularization and Islamization




One of the effects of modernization and secularization is the ambiguous concept of science. Because, Western civilization has made science problematic. Besides having misunderstood the meaning of science, this civilization has eliminated the intent and purpose of science. Not denied, Western civilization has produced useful knowledge. However, it cannot be denied that the civilization has produced knowledge that has damaged the spiritual life of humans in particular.

The brief paper below wants to show that an epistemological revolution is needed to answer the epistemological crisis that is sweeping the modern world civilization.


I. Modern Western Epistemology

Western historians conferred the title of Father of modern philosophy on René Descartes (m. 1650), who formulated a principle, I think then I'm there (I think, therefore I am). With this principle, Descartes has made the ratio the only criterion (rationalism) to measuring truth. Unlike Descartes, David Hume (m. 1776), asserts that the five senses are the source of knowledge (empiricism). Therefore, Hume concludes that science cannot be achieved (skepticism). Answering doubts about the science raised by the skeptical David Hume, Immanuel Kant (m. 1804) argues that knowledge is possible (knowledge is possible). The reason, in addition to the statement analytic a priori and synthetic a posteriori, there is also a statement synthethic a priori. However, Kant emphasized that metaphysics is unlikely because it is not based on the senses. According to Kant, metaphysics does not contain statements synthetic a priori such as those manifested in mathematics, physics and sciences based on empirical facts.

Kant calls metaphysics a transcendent illusion (a transcendental illusion) Kant concluded that metaphysical statements have no epistemological value (metaphysicial assertions are without epistemological value).[1]

The epistemology that developed in the West in modern times is increasingly rolling with the emergence of Hegel's dialectical philosophy (m. 1831). Influenced by Kant's thinking, Hegel argues that knowledge is ongoing process, wherein what is known and I who know continues to develop: the stage which has been reached "denied" or negated "by the new stage. Not in the sense that the old stage is no longer valid, but the old stage, in the light of later knowledge, seems limited So the old stage is not true because it is limited, and as such it is not considered truth, but the truth in denial is maintained.[2]

The emergence of a secular epistemology that is dominant in Western civilization in modern times has an impact on the emergence of atheism. Various scientific disciplines, such as in theology, philosophy, science, sociology, psychology, politics, economics, and others are inseparable from atheism.


One of the pioneers of atheism in the modern age was Ludwig Feurbach (1804-1872), student to Hegel. Feurbach, a Christian theologian, affirms the highest principle of philosophy human. Although religion or theology denies, but in essence, religion is the worship of humankind (religion that worships man) Christianity itself which states God is human and man is God (God is man, man is God). So, religion will deny God who is not human. The true meaning of theology is anthropology (The true sense of Theology is Anthropology) Religion is a dream of human reason (Religion is the dream of human mind).[3]


Influenced by the work of Feurbach, Karl Marx (m. 1883) argues that religion is a complaint of a depressed creature, a feeling of a world without a heart, as it is a spirit of an age without spirit. Religion is the opium of the people. In Marx's view, religion is a secondary factor, while the primary factor is economics.[4]


In addition, Marx praised the work of Charles Robert Darwin (m. 1882) in the field of science, which concluded that God did not play a role in creation. For Darwin, the origin of the species (origin of species) not from God, but from "adaptation to the environment" (adaptation to the environment) According to him again, God did not create living things. All different species actually come from one common ancestor. Species are different from one another due to natural conditions (natural conditions).[5]


Atheism also developed within the sociology discipline. Auguste Comte, the inventor of the term sociology, saw belief in religion as a form of society's backwardness. In Comte's view, society develops through three theoretical phases, namely: the theological phase is also called the fictitious phase; the metaphysical phase is also called the abstract phase; the scientific phase is also called the positive phase. Each phase has characteristics that conflict with each other. Kharasteristik from each phase is contrary to one another.
In the theological phase, human reason considers phenomena produced by supernatural powers. In the metaphysical phase, for example, human reason considers phenomena produced by abstract forces, or real entities, which replace supernatural powers. In the positive phase, human reason realizes that absolute truth is impossible to achieve.[6] Comte's opinion of rejecting religion was followed by other sociologists such as Emile Durkheim (m. 1917) and Herbert Spencer. Religion, said Spencer, stems from human dreams about the spirit in another world.[7]


Atheistic thinking resonates in psychology. Sigmund Freud (m. 1939), a prominent psychologist affirming religious doctrines is an illusion. Religion is not in accordance with the reality of the world. Not religion, but only scientific work, the only way to guide science.[8]

Criticism of the existence of God also resonates in philosophy. In his work Thus spoke Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) menulis: "God died; now we want the overman to live."[9] In Nietzsche's view, religion is "making a moment better for a moment and making it easier" (momentary amelioration and narcoticizing).[10] For Nietzsche, religion cannot be adapted to science. Nietzsche stated: "someone cannot believe in religious dogmas and metaphysics if someone has strict methods to reach the truth in the heart and to someone. "[11] Nietzsche divorces the relationship between religion and knowledge, Nietzsche states: "Between right religion and science, there is no connection, friendship, and hostility: both settled in different stars."[12] It should be noted, when Nietzsche criticized religion, he referred more specifically to Christianity.[13]


Apart from giving birth to atheism, modern Western epistemology has also secularized Christian theology. As a result, Christian theology experienced paradigm shift (paradigm shift) If in medieval times, Christian theologians such as Saint Augustine (m. 430), Boethius (m. 524), Johannes Scotus Erigena (m. 877), Saint Anselm (m. 1109), Saint Bonavantura (m. 1274) and Santo Thomas Aquinas (m. 1274) modified ancient Greek philosophy to fit Christian theology, then Christian theologians in the 20th century like Karl Barth (1886-1968), Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945),[14] Friedrich Gogarten (1887-1967),[15] Paul van Buren (m. 1998), Thomas Altizer, Gabriel Vahanian,[16] William Hamilton, Woolwich, Werner and Lotte Pelz, Harvey Cox[17] and others modify Christian theology to fit modern-secular Western civilization. They assert that Christian teaching must be adapted to the life-view of secular modern science.[18] They made a new interpretation of the Bible and rejected the old interpretation that stated that there was another world that was greater and more religious than this nature. They refute the role and attitude of the Churches who claim that the Church has special social privileges, strengths and property.[19] They reevaluate the teachings of Christianity to remain relevant to the development of secular modern society.[20] Secularization of theology in Christianity caused it to become the periphery in the flow of modern Western civilization.


Nietzsche's thinking was still echoing and post modernist philosophers such as Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Richard Rorty made Nietzsche's thought a reference. If Nietzsche proclaims God is death, then Jacques Derrida in the middle of the 20th century declared the author is death.

The concise explanation above shows the concept of science that comes from reason and senses, has produced various kinds of ideas such as rationalism, empiricism, skepticism, relativeism, atheism, agnotism, humanism, secularism, existentialism, materialism, socialism, capitalism and liberalism. Westernization of science has not only divorced the harmonious relationship between man and God, but has also eliminated Revelation as a source of knowledge.

II. Islamization of Contemporary Science (
Islamization of present-day Knowledge)
Observing the face of Western epistemology, Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas stated that the Westernization of science was the result of confusion and skepticism. Westernization of science has raised doubts and conjectures to the stage of the 'scientific' methodology. Not only that, the Westernization of science has also made doubts a legitimate epistemological tool in science. According to him again, Westernization of science is not built on Revelation and religious belief. But it is built on cultural traditions that are reinforced by philosophical speculations related to secular life that concentrate humans as rational beings. As a result, science and ethical and moral values, which are governed by human ratios, are constantly changing.[21]

In the view of Naquib al-Attas, modern-Western science projected through his life-view was built on the intellectual and psychological vision of Western culture and civilization. According to him, there are 5 factors that imbue Western culture and civilization:[22] (1) reason is relied on to guide human life; (2) being dualistic towards reality and truth; (3) affirming aspects of existence that project a secular view of life;[23] (4) defending the doctrine of humanism; (5) making drama and tragedy as dominant elements in human nature and existence.[24]


Realizing the scientific crisis in Western culture and civilization, Naquib al-Attas concluded that knowledge that developed in the West should not be applied in the Muslim world. Science can be used as a very subtle and sharp tool for disseminating the ways and views of life in a culture.[25] The reason is, science is not value-free (value-free), but a lot of value (value laden).[26]

The rejection of the Western science paradigm, does not necessarily mean that it also denies the similarities between Western and Islamic epistemology. There is, according to Naquib al-Attas, the equality between Islam and philosophy and modern science concerning the source and method of science, the unity of the rational and empirical knowledge, the combination of realism, idealism and pragmatism as a cognitive foundation for science philosophy; process and philosophy of science. However, there are also some fundamental differences in the view of life (divergent worldviews) concerning the final Reality. For him, in Islam, Revelation is a source of knowledge about the ultimate reality and truth regarding creatures and creators.[27]Revelation is the basis for a metaphysical framework to explore the philosophy of science as a system that describes reality and truth from the point of view of rationalism and empiricism.[28] Without Revelation, science is considered the only authentic knowledge (science is the sole authentic knowledge).[29] Without Revelation, this science is only related to phenomena. As a result, conclusions to phenomena will always change according to the times. Without Revelation, the reality understood is only limited to the real world which is considered the only reality.[30]

Diagnosing the virus contained in the Westernization of science, Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas treated it with Islamization of science.[31] The reason, the biggest challenge facing Muslims is that modern science is not neutral and has been infused into religious, cultural and philosophical presuppositions, which actually comes from the reflection of Western human consciousness and experience. So, modern science must be Islamized.[32]


Islamizing knowledge is not an easy job like labeling. Besides that, not all of the West means being rejected. Because, there are a number of similarities between Islam and Western philosophy and science. Therefore, someone who Islamizes knowledge, he needs to fulfill pre-conditions, that is, he must be able to identify Islamic life-views (the Islamic worldview) while being able to understand Western culture and civilization.[33] Life-view in Islam is a vision of reality and truth (the vision of reality and truth) Reality and truth in Islam are not merely thoughts about the physical realm and human involvement in history, social, political and cultural as in the secular Western concept of the world, which is limited to the world that can be seen. Reality and truth are interpreted based on a study of metaphysics for a visible and invisible world. So, the Islamic life-view encompasses the world and the hereafter, which aspects of the world must be connected in a very deep way to the aspects of the hereafter, and the aspect of the hereafter has the final and final significance. View-life of Islam is not based on dichotomous methods such as objective and subjective, historical and normative. However, reality and truth are understood by a unifying method (tawhid). Islamic-life views come from revelations supported by reason and intuition. Religious substances such as: his name, his faith and his practice, his worship, his doctrine and theological system have existed in revelation and explained by the Prophet. Islam is complete, perfect and authentic. It does not require progress, development and change in things that are already very clear. Islamic-life views comprise various interrelated concepts such as the concept of God, revelation, perfection, human psychology, science, religion, freedom, value and kindness and happiness. These concepts determine the form of change, development and progress. Islamic insights are built on the unique concept of God, which does not exist in the tradition of philosophy, culture, civilization and other religions.[34]


Therefore, Islam is a religion and a civilization.[35] Islam is a religion that overcomes and crosses time because the system of values ​​it contains is absolute. The truth of the value of Islam is not only for the past, but also now and in the future. The values ​​that exist in Islam are all time. So, Islam has its own absolute life-view, encompassing the issues of divinity, prophethood, truth, the universe etc. Islam has its own ontological, cosmological and psychological interpretation of the nature. Islam rejects the idea of ​​deconecration of value because it relativizes all moral systems.[36]


After knowing deeply about the views of Islam and the West, the process of Islamization can only be done. Why, the Islamization of science today (the Islamization of present-day knowledge), involves two interrelated processes:

i) to integrate the key elements and concepts that shape Western culture and civilization (5 elements previously mentioned), from every modern science field, especially in humanities science. However, natural sciences, physics and applications must be likewise embodied in particular interpretations the facts and the inside formulation theories.[37]
According to Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, if not in accordance with Islamic-life views, then a fact becomes incorrect. [38] In addition, modern sciences must be examined carefully. This includes methods, concepts, presuppositions, symbols, of modern science; along with empirical and rational aspects, and that have an impact on values ​​and ethics; the interpretation of the historicity of the science, the building of its scientific theory, its presuppositions relating to the world, and the rationality of scientific processes, the theory of science about the universe, its classification, its boundaries, its relation to other sciences and its relationship with the social must be carefully examined.[39]

ii) incorporating Islamic elements along with key concepts in every field of current science that is relevant.[40]

If both processes are completed, Islamization will liberate humans from magics, mythology, animism, national cultural traditions that are contrary to Islam, and then from secular control to the mind and language.[41] Islamization will free the human mind from doubt (shakk), guess (Dann) and empty argumentation (look') towards believing the truth about spiritual reality, intelligible and material.[42] Islamization will issue interpretations of contemporary science from ideology, secular meanings and expressions.[43]

III. Criticism of Islamization of Science
[44]
Some contemporary Muslim thinkers such as Fazlur Rahman, Muhsin Mahdi, Abdus Salam, Abdul Karim Soroush and Bassam Tibi criticized the concept of Islamization of science.[45] Fazlur Rahman, for example, argues that science cannot be Islamized because there is nothing wrong in science. The problem is only in abuse.[46] For Fazlur Rahman, science has two qualities, such as a "double-edged weapon" which must be used with care and responsibility while at the same time it is very important to use it properly when obtaining it.[47]

Fazlur Rahman is right in stating that science will depend on how to use it. However, Fazlur Rahman seems to ignore if the basic concept of science itself has been built on certain life-views. The concept of God, man, the relationship between God and man, nature, religion, the source of knowledge will determine the way a person views science.

In addition, secular thinking seems to also be pervasive in Fazlur Rahman's thinking. This is evident, when he argues that science does not need to reach the level of finality or belief. He stated: "Obviously it is not a necessity that a certain interpretation once accepted must always be accepted; there will always be space and necessity for new interpretations, and this is actually an ongoing process."

In contrast to Fazlur Rahman, Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas asserted that science in matters of certainty is final, not open to revision by later generations, other than elaboration and application. New interpretations are only correctly related to the scientific aspects of the Qur'an and natural phenomena.[48]

In general, critics of Islamization of science argue that science is examining facts, objectively and independently from humans, culture or religion, and must be separated from values. Abdus Salam, for example, states: "There is only one universal science, the problems and their forms are international and there is no such thing as Islamic science as there is no Hindu science, Jewish science or Christian science."[49]

Abdus Salam's statement shows that there is no such thing as Islamic science. This secular statement shows that Abdus Salam divorced Islamic life-views as a metaphysical basis for science. In fact, the view of life of Islam will always be related to the thoughts and activities of a scientist. The Abdus Salam statement above shows the statement the results of a secular Muslim scientist. According to Prof. Alparslan Açikgenç, scientific thoughts and activities are made in the life-view of scientists who provide him with schemes of certain scientific concepts as well as ethical guidelines.[50] A scientist will work according to his perspective related to the framework and the life-view he has.[51]


Criticism of Islamization of science was also proposed by Abdul Karim Sorush. He concludes that Islamization of science is illogical or impossible (the impossibility or illogicality of Islamization of knowledge) The reason is that reality is not Islamic or not Islamic. The truth for that is not Islamic or not Islamic. Therefore, science is a true proposition, not Islamic or not Islamic. Previous Muslim philosophers never used the term Islamic philosophy. The term is a label given by the West (a western coinage) Briefly elaborating on his argument, Abdul Karim Sorush stated; (1) metaphysical, empirical or logical methods are independent of Islam or any religion. The method cannot be Islamized; (2) Correct answers cannot be Islamic. Truth is truth and truth cannot be Islamic; (3) The questions and problems raised are seeking the truth, even if submitted by Non-Muslims; (4) Methods that are presuppositions in science cannot be Islamicised.[52]


The natural view contained in Abdul Karim Sorush's argument is a reality as a change. Science is limited only to studies of changing phenomena. In fact, reality is fixed and changing. In view of Naquib al-Attas, reality is at once both permanence and change, not in the sense that change is permanent, but in thes sense that there is something permanent whereby change occurs.[53]

The Islamization of science is also regarded as indigenous (indigenization), as stated by Bassam Tibi. He understood the Islamization of science in response to the third world to claim the universality of Western science. Islamization is reaffirming locally against invading global science.[54]

Bassam Tibi's understanding of Islamization as indigenous which is related to the local is not appropriate. Islamization is not separating the local from the universal opposition of Western science. Bassam Tibi's view of the Islamization of the science of charge is more political and sociological. Because the Islamic ummah in Islam are in the developing world and the West is a developed world, the idea of ​​Islamization of science is a local idea that opposes global ideas. In fact, the emergence of Islamization of science is due to differences in the nature of views between Islam and other religions or cultures. Islamization not only criticizes Western global culture and civilization. He also transformed local, ethnic forms to fit the Islamic worldview. Islamization is to universalize the forms of culture, customs, traditions and locality so that they are in accordance with the universal Islamic religion.[55]


In conclusion, to answer the challenge of the hegemony of westernization of science which is currently sweeping the world civilization, the Islamization of science is needed.

Wallahu a'lam bis sawab.

By: Ustad Adnin Armas



[1] Justus Harnack, Kant's Theory of Knowledge, pen. M. Holmes Hartshorne (London: Macmillan, 1968), 142-45.
[2] Quoted from Franz Magnis-Suseno, The thinking of Karl Marx: From Utopian Socialism to the Disputes of Revisionism (Jakarta; Gramedia Main Library, 2001), 56, summarized Karl Marx's Thoughts.
[3] Ludwig Furbach, The Essence of Christianity, penerjemah George Eliot (New York: Prometheus Books, 1989), xiii-xix.
[4] Quoted from Franz Magnis-Suseno, Karl Marx's Thoughts, 71-76.
[5] Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (New York: New American Library, 1958), 437.
[6] Auguste Comte, Introduction to Positive Philosophy, 1-2.
[7] Jonathan H. Turner, Herbert Spencer: A Renewed Appreciation, 1: 136-138.
[8] Sigmund Freud, The Future of an Illusion, editor dan pen. James Strachey (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1961), 40.
[9] Quoted from Robert C. Holub, Friedrich Nietzsche, (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1995), 138.
[11] Neitzcshe states: "one cannot believe these dogmas of religion and metaphysics if one has in one's heart and head the rigorous methods of acquiring truth." Quoted from Robert C. Holub, Friedrich Nietzsche, New York: Twayne Publishers, 1995), 129.
[12] Nietzsche menyatakan: "There exists between religion and true science neither affinity, nor friendship, nor even enmity; they dwell on different stars." Quoted from Robert C. Holub, Friedrich Nietzsche, 129.
[13] Criticizing Christianity, Nietzsche stated: "it desires to destroy, shatter, stupefy, intoxicate, the one thing it does not desire is measure: and that is why it is in the profoundest sense barbaric, Asiatic, ignoble, un-Hellenic."Quoted from Robert C. Holub, Friedrich Nietzsche, 131.
[14] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German Pastor who was executed on April 8, 1945 by the Nazi Gestapo for being involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler, stated that now Christians are moving towards truly a time without religion (completely religionless time) During 1900, Bonhoeffer stressed, Christianity relied on a priori religion (religious a priori) He called for Christian teachings to be conveyed in a secular way. Bonhoeffer stated: "How do we talk about God — without religion, that is, without the presumptions of metaphysics, kebatinan and so on that are temporally conditioned?" (How do we speak of God—without religion, i.e., without the temporally conditioned presuppositions of metaphysics, inwardness, and so on?) How do we talk about God in a secular way? (How do we speak in a secular way about God ?) In what ways are we religious secular Christians ...? (In what way are we religionless secular Christians…) See Dietrich Bonhoeffer, A Testament to freedom: the essential writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, editor Geffrey B. Kelly dan F. Burton Nelson (San Fransisco: HarperCollins, 1990), 526.
[15] Friedrich Gogarten stated: "Secularization, regardless of what might have developed from it in modern times, is a legitimate consequence of the Christian faith. "(Secularization regardless of what may have developed from it in modern times, is a legitimate consequence of the Christian faith) Quoted from Harvey Cox, "Why Christianity Must be secularized" in The Great Ideas Today 1967 (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1967), 11, then summarized GO.
[16] Gabriel Vahanian is a Neo-Calvinist theologian. It states: "Secular is a Christian's must." According to Vahanian, God's death is a religious and cultural event. In modern and scientific societies, events in the Bible are considered myths, are outdated, and deprecated.
[17] According to Cox, there are three important components in the Bible which are the basic framework for secularization, namely: 'disenchantment of nature'associated with creation (Creation), 'desacralization of politics'with massive migration (Exodus) Jews from Egypt and 'deconsecration of values'with the Sinai Agreement (Sinai Covenant) See Harvey Cox, The Secular City: Secularization and Urbanization in Theological Perspective (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967), 17, hereinafter abbreviated The Secular City.
[19] Harvey Cox, 'Why Christianity Must Be Secularized" dalam GO, 9-10.
[20] About Secular Christian theology, see my book, The Influence of Orientalist Christianity on Liberal Islam; Interactive Dialogue with Activist Liberal Islam Network, (Jakarta; Gema Insani Press, 2003), 3-14., About the secular term, see Harvey Cox, The Secular City, 16-17.
[21] See the definition of Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas on 'Western civilization' in his work Islam and Secularism (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, second edition, 1993), 133-35, then summarized Islam and Secularism.
[23] See his criticism of secularization in his work Islam and Secularism, 38-43.
[24] See the criticism in his work Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition of the Fundamental Elements of the Worldview of Islam (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1995), 88; 99-108, hereinafter abbreviated Prolegomena.
[25] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Minutes for Muslims (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 2001), 49. Even Risalah was published in 2001, but it has been in existence since 1973. The idea contained in the manuscript was developed into several monograph works.
[26] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Islam and Secularism, 134.
[27] Sources and Methods Science according to Naquib al-Attas is (I) the senses which include 5 external senses such as touch, smell, taste, see, and hear, and 5 internal senses such as representation, estimation, retention (retention), Recall the past (recollection) and fantasy. (II) The right message is based on the authority (transmit): i.e. absolute authority namely divine authority (al-Qur'an) and prophetic authority (apostle) and relative authority, namely the consensus of the ulama (tawatur) and khabar of people who are trusted in general and (III) common sense intuition. See the scheme of the epistemological structure of Naquib al-Attas in Adi Setia, "Philosophy of Science of Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas," Islam & Science 1 (2003), No. 2., 189.
[28] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Islam and the Philosophy of Science (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1989), 9.
[31] In the late 60's and early 70's, Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas was very active in guiding the movements of students at several universities in Malaysia to focus their struggle on fundamental issues that were very important in the development of the nation such as language problems, culture, secularization, Westernization and Islamization., see the work of Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy and Practice of Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas – An Exposition of the Original Concept of Islamization (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1998), 237, further summarized The Educational Philosophy.
[34] See the comprehensive description of Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas on the Islamic-life view Prolegomena, 1-39.
[35] Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 298.
[36] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Islam and Secularism, 30-32.
[37] Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 313.
[39] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Prolegomena, 114.
[40] Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 313.
[41] Al-Attas stated: "Islamization is the liberation of man first from magical, mythological, animistic, national-cultural tradition opposed to Islam, and then from secular control over his reason and his language. "See Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Islam and Secularism, 44.
[42] Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 312.
[43] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, The Concept of Education in Islam, 43.
[44] The author thanked Mohd. Zaidi bin Ismail, a young Muslim intellectual of Malaysia, has lent writer Fazlur Rahman's articles, Abdul Karim Sorush and Bassam Tibi.
[45] See the criticism of Fazlur Rahman, Muhsin Mahdi, Abdus Salam, Abdul Karim Sorush and Bassam Tibi towards the Islamization of Knowledge knowledge in Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 395-420.
[46] Fazlur Rahman, "Islamization of Knowledge: A Response," The American Journal of Islamic Social Science 5, No. 1 (1988), 4.
[47] Quoted from Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 398.
[48] See more Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 399-00.
[49] Abdus Salam states; "There is only one universal science, its problems and modalities are international and there is no such thing as Islamic science just as there is no Hindu science, no Jewish science, nor Christian science." Quoted from Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 410.
[50] Alparslan Açikgenç, Islamic Sciance: Towards a Definition (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1996).
[51] Alparslan Açikgenç, Holistic Approach to Scientific Traditions, Islam & Science 1 (2003), No. 1., 99-114.
[52] Abdul Karim Sorush, "The Possibility of Islamicization of Knowledge." This paper has been laid out at the International Conference on "Islam and Modernism: The Fazlur Rahman Experiment," which was organized by The Center for the Organization of Cultural Activities, Istanbul Metropolitan Conference, Istanbul, February 22-23, 1997.
[53] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Islam and the Philosophy of Science, 32.
[54] Bassam Tibi, "Culture and Knowledge: The Politics of Islamization of Knowledge as a Postmodern Project? The Fundamentalis Claim to De-Westernization," Theory, Culture & Society, Volume. 12 (1995), 2-5.
[55] See also Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy, 414-17.



Undergroundtauhid/The Truth Seeker Media

Related article: