Mas Imuch,
Subyek PKS adalah penanda dari nama milis. Bukan saya yang bikin kok, itu otomatis muncul di email. Sebagai anggota milis PKS boleh dong saya berkomentar.... salam, rd ----- Original Message ----- From: imuchtarom To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 12:18 AM Subject: [ppiindia] Re: mayoritas penemuan modern ditemukan ilmuwan muslim Supaya mengurangi subyektivitas, akronim "PKS" sudah saya hapus dari subjectnya { ini merupakan konsekuensi dari kebiasaan bung RD yang men"spam" posting: mereply sebuah posting di milis "A" tapi di cc ke "semua" milis :) } dengan adanya "Tag/Label" seperti *PKS* maupun *Hidayatullah*, maka akan ada resiko, diskusi berikutnya akan mengundang "bias ideologi" alias tidak subyektif lagi, menjadi debat antara "pendukung" dan "penentang" pihak-pihak yang berkaitan dengan label nama tersebut :) ==================================================== <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem> An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claims is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject ===================================================== Artikel yang ditulis di Hidayatullah 'sounds' familiar to me :-), tetapi tanggapan seperti yang ditulis oleh pak Kartono juga 'equally familiar' to me, ... :-)) Mungkin bisa kita coba untuk mendiskusikannya secara lebih obyektif: => Berdasarkan tradisi dalam masyarakat ilmiah, seseorang boleh saja menulis apa saja, asal itu memang berdasarkan fakta. Jadi Hidayatullah boleh saja menulis artikel semacam itu meskipun di jaman ini itu kadang-2 bisa menghasilkan tanggapan negatif, bahkan dari kalangan Muslim sendiri, seperti yang dicontihkan oleh tanggapan pak Kartono ( artinya: tulisan semacam itu mungki politically incorrect :) ) Tetapi jika yang ditulis memang berdasarkan fakta, secara ilmiah itu bisa diterima. Hanya saya lebih setuju jika judulnya dibuat lebih netral, misalnya "Kontribusi/Sumbangan Muslim dalam Penemuan Ilmu Pengetahuan/Sains" misalnya, kata "mayoritas" nya dihilangkan, takutnya overclaim :=) => Menurut pendapat saya, seperti dalam tradisi masyarakat ilmiah, kita diwajibkan memberi 'kredit' /penghargaan kepada mereka yang berhak dalam menemukan atau menyumbangkan suatu ide/pengetahuan. Bukankah ini yang menjadi salah satu isu friksi antara Malaysia- Indonesia saat ini? ( Indonesia menganggap Malaysia 'mengadopsi' suatu karya seni, tanpa mengakui atau memberikan kredit kepada 'pemulik' Intellectual property nya ). => Kenyatannya memang belum semua pihak memberikan kredit /penghargaan yang adil terhadap siapa saja yang telah berkontribusi dalam perkembangan sains. Dominasi barat jelas sangat terasa. Banyak yang bisa diketengahkan sebagai contoh. Misalnya, kalau berbicara mengenai teori Heliosentris, orang biasanya hanya menyebut satu nama: Kopernikus. Padahal Kopernikus sampai pada kesimpulan itu melalui 'proses belajar' dari teori-teori para Astronom yang lain, termasuk Astronom Muslim: Al-Tutsy. Juga sebenarnya sebelumnya Astronom-astronom India telah mengungkapkan dugaan mengenai adanya gerakan rotasi bumi. Rotasi bumi, artinya bahwa gerakan matahari yang terbit di ufuk timur dan tenggelam di ufuk barat itu sebenarnya merupakan gerak "semu" akibat rotasi bumi. Ini kan sejatinya menuju pada teori Heliosentris?ยด Masalahnya di jaman itu mungkin tradisi penulisan ilmiah yang "benar" belum membudaya, sehingga mungkin sulit bagi kita untuk mengecek paper/disertasi nya Kopernikus dan mencoba melihat "daftar pustaka" yang dijadikan referensinya ( ada dispute serupa mengenai kontribusi Ibn Khaldun, bapak Sosiolog abad pertengahan di dalam membentuk teori ekonominya Adam Smith ). *** Mengenai filsafat, sebagian yang ditulis pak Kartono, benar, bahwa filosof Muslim abad pertengahan belajar dari filosof Yunani. Tapi itu belum cerita seluruhnya, nada tulisan pak Kartono terkesan "undermining" peran dunia Islam dalam "mentransmisikan pengetahuan" ke Eropa ( dengan tambahan Muslim's own Knowledge/ contribution ). Sebagian besar ilmuwan yang meneliti soal kontribusi dunia Islam di abad pertengahan di dalam pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan umumnya hanya memberi "kredit" kepada Muslim sekedar sebagai -> tukang penerjemah sains & filsafat Yunani -> tukang forward: "memforward" pengetahuan di atas ke Eropa, di masa kekuasaan Muslim di Spanyol ( kontribusi yang "minim" di atas pun tidak semua orang menyadari/mengakuinya, termasuk orang-orang Islam sendiri ). Sebagian kecil ilmuwan (ada yang muslim ada yang bukan, it doesn't matter) meyakini dan berusaha menunjukkan bahwa Dunia Islam di saat itu juga punya kontribusi original yang mereka ramu dan tambahkan pada pengetahuan yang mereka dapat dari Yunani maupun India. Di bawah ini saya kutipkan tulisan mengenai Thomas Aquinas yang dikenal sebagai Filosof Kristen yang besar pengaruhnya dalam penafsiran ajaran kristen, yang menurut banyak ahli juga sedikit banyak dipengaruhi oleh pemikiran filosouf Muslim abad pertengahan, baik dia sadari atau tidak. ---( ihsan h )----------------------------- <http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/20/014.html> .................. We could stop here, and we'd have pretty much given the mainstream opinion of the Arab influence on medieval philosophy. By preserving the works of Plato and Aristotle, they filled out the incomplete corpus possessed by the Latin West and brought about an enormous shift in philosophical speculation; indeed some scholars trace the seeds of the Renaissance to this deposit of classical wisdom. This view is obvious, and easy-and wrong. To look at the Arabs in that light is to treat them as a kind of handy time capsule, storing material from the ancient European world and transmitting it at an appropriate time to the medieval European world. To treat the influence of the Arab world on medieval Europe in this way is to overlook the contributions made by the Arabs themselves. S. M. Ghazanfar, chair of the department of Economics at the University of Idaho-Moscow, phrases it thus: the mainstream paradigm, in general, describes the influence of Islamic scholarship chiefly in terms of its preservation and transmission of portions of ancient Greek philosophy that had been lost to medieval Europe. As some have suggested, the paradigm is too rigid -almost unshakable, despite all the new evidence and literature. George Sarton once criticized those who will glibly say `the Arabs simply translated Greek writings, they were industrious imitators...' This is not absolutely untrue, but it is such a small part of the truth that when it is allowed to stand alone, it is worse than a lie. And then there is another historian of science, Colin Ronan, Too often science in Arabia has been seen nothing more than a holding operation. The area has been viewed as a giant storehouse for previously discovered scientific results, keeping them until they could be passed on for use in the West. But this is, of course, a travesty of the truth. (Note the word science is used in its historic meaning-knowledge, comprehensively defined, including philosophy, etc.) Medieval Europe did not simply absorb its forgotten Aristotelian heritage from Arabs who functioned purely instrumentally. Islamic scholars also brought their own philosophy to the table, and dialogues between the Islamic and Christian worlds were fruitful on both sides. Islamic philosophers of the medieval period wrestled with many of the same issues as their Christian and Jewish counterparts. The resolution of tension between faith and reason was immensely important to all philosophers of this period. Greek philosophy was developed independently of the monotheistic religions of the Book, and trying to combine Greek philosophy with Judaism, Christianity, or Islam inevitably led to difficulties. The ways in which Islamic philosophers settled these issues, however, were different from the approaches taken by Christian philosophers, and the dialogues between Islamic and Christian philosophers brought these new perspectives to the Latin West. I'm not saying that the European philosophers wound up agreeing with the Arab philosophers, but rather that the European position was often shaped by their need to refute certain Arab positions. For example, Siger of Brabant, a dedicated Averroist, was known for his claim, following his Islamic predecessor, that truths of faith and truths of reason can be incompatible and yet both true. This dual-truth theory had been controversial within Islam and was of course also controversial within Christianity; in order to combat it, Aquinas made explicit what is now official Catholic doctrine of the two sources of knowledge, the book of scripture and the book of nature: ***************************************************** Scripture rightly interpreted will never contradict reason rightly applied. ***************************************************** Another issue that concerned Islamic scholars of this time was the precise nature and definition of the soul. In the 11th century, Avicenna, strongly influenced by Neoplatonism, argued for a division between the active and passive elements of the human mind. The active elements of the mind were actually the effects of an independent being known as the agent intellect, created by the transcendent Intelligence that governs the world we live in, whose job is to supply forms to matter and to illuminate the passive elements of the human mind, enabling our minds to function. The passive elements, also known as the possible intellects, exist in each person and are unique to each person. Averroes, in the 12th century, apparently argued, following a difficult passage in Aristotle's De Anima, that not only the agent intellect but even the possible intellect were separate entities, thus denying a unique personal and spiritual element to the human soul and thereby denying personal immortality. This was not only a controversial point within Islam and Christianity, but it gave rise to Aquinas' famous treatise De Unitate Intellectus Contra Averroistas in which he was forced to develop and elucidate a view of human cognition which allowed for a recognition of an active and passive element, but which was also consistent with personal immortality. My specific area of research also illustrates this point. I have been working on a text called the Liber de Causis (LdC, a 9th century Arabic synopsis of a neoPlatonic work, Proclus' Elements of Theology. It was Thomas Aquinas, in fact, who first recognized this work as a synopsis of the Elements of Theology (ET), which had only recently become available in Latin; until then, it was generally thought to be a work of Aristotle. Thomas believed that the LdC was more or less an exact synopsis of the ET, and in his commentary he treats the two works as if they are pretty much equivalent. It is clear, however, that there are certain differences, and recent scholarship has begun to trace these differences to the influence of Islamic scholarship on the author of the LdC. A conjectured source document called the *Plotiniana Arabica is believed to be the source of many of the subtle alterations between the Elements of Theology (ET) and the Liber de Causis (LdC); scholars such as Richard Taylor and Cristina d'Ancona Costa have recently been investigating this phenomenon. Moreover, as d'Ancona- Costa observes (and I agree) not only does the Liber de Causis show evidence of Plotinian as well as Proclean metaphysics-we're still talking about Greeks here-but also that it substantially transforms the doctrines of its neoplatonic sources (p. 42), particularly in its adaptation of the neoplatonic One to pure creative being which is esse tantum. This treatment of pure creative being is neither strictly Platonic nor Aristotelian, nor does it simply and obviously arise from a synthesis of Plato and Aristotle; it is a product of the unknown Moslem author of the Liber de Causis, and a powerful influence on its Latin readers. Thus, avoiding the pernicious view that the importance of Islamic scholarship in the Middle Ages was simply its transmission of ancient Greek texts, we can see that Islamic scholars engaged and challenged Christian and Jewish thinkers in the Latin West, influencing their views on critical metaphysical and theological issues such as the relation between faith and reason, the operation of the human soul, and the nature of God. Thomas Aquinas dan Mulla Sadra : ------------------------------- <http://www.innerexplorations.com/philtext/ltsadra.htm> A long tradition of Islamic metaphysics saw one of its greatest flowerings in the writings of Sadr al-Din Shirazi, or Mulla Sadra (1571-1640). His work was taken up in the 19th century by Hadi Ibn Mahdi Sabzawari, and this rich metaphysical tradition supposedly has lasted in Iran until the present. See Christianity in the Crucible, Chapter 6. The metaphysics of Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) has striking similarities with that of Mulla Sadra, and it has developed and produred in the Christian west ever since the 13th century. But these two metaphysical traditions have never really encountered one another. Is there still interest in Iran in the work of Mulla Sadra and Sabzawari? Are there metaphysicians in the line of Mulla Sadra who would like to carry on a dialogue with metaphysicians from the tradition of Thomas Aquinas? This is a wonderful opportunity that should not be missed. Up --- In "Kartono Mohamad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Lha wong Hidayatullah kok didenger, Dit. Tapi apa > yang ditulis di Hidayatullah itu adalah sikap yang > biasa terjadi ketika seseorang baru saja bertemu > dan hidup bersama dengan orang dari budaya lain. > > Ini salah satu tahap awal dari bagian proses > intercultural learning. Tahap itu bermula dari > rasa rendah diri terhadap budayanya sendiri lalu > melakukan reaksi defensif untuk membuktikan bahwa > budayanya tidak lebih rendah dengan menunjukkan > sejarah lama tanpa ia sendiri mengetahui benar > sejarah itu. > > Menyedihkan memang kalau menganggap filsafah > modern (barat) berkembang dari filsafah Islam, > lha wong filusuf Islam jaman dulu itu bermula > dari belajar filsafah Yunani kuno. > > Tahap semacam ini sering dijumpai pada mereka > yang sebenarnya belum dewasa atau belum mempu > berpikiran dewasa. Kalau dipelihara ia akan > berubah menjadi gangguan kejiwaan yang berupa > paranoia. Akibatnya ia selalu curiga dan sibuk > memusuhi budaya lain tetapi tidak pernah berupaya > membuktikan bahwa ia mampu juga berdiri sama > tinggi dengan budaya lain. > > Tahap mereka itu memang baru sampai di situ. > KM > > -------Original Message------- > > Mayoritas Penemuan Modern Ditemukan Ilmuwan Muslim Cetak > halaman ini > <http://hidayatullah.com/index2 > > Kamis, 08 November 2007 > > Penemuan ilmu pengetahuan dan teknologi modern > saat ini, sesungguhnya telah lama ditemukan kaum > Muslim. Demikian ujar guru besar Columbia > University > > */Hidayatullah.com--/* > Para ilmuwan Muslim sudah membuat banyak penemuan- > penemuan dari usia yang ada, demikian ujar Prof. > Dr. George Saliba, guru besar Universitas Arab > dan Islam Universitas Columbia. > > Pernyataan Saliba ini disampaikan dalam sebuah > seminar di Government College University (GCU), > hari Senin kemarin. > > Saliba hadir dalam seminar bertajuk, The Problems > of Historiography of Islamic Science, yang diselenggarakan > di Fazl-e-Hussain Hall. Saliba memberi suatu kritik > dari buku klasik tentang kenaikan ilmu pengetahuan > Islam. > > Ia memerinci permasalahan dalam banyak buku dan > menjelaskan penulisan sejarah alternatif bahwa > digambarkan jika perkembangan ilmiah Islam > sebagai hasil interaksi sosial dan kondisi- > kondisi politis di dalam kerajaan Islam. > > Saliba mengatakan, filsafat Islam telah mendorong > ilmu pengetahuan dan telah mendukung berbagai disiplin- > disiplin ilmu. Termasuk tumbuh-tumbuhan, ilmu hewan, > aljabar, trigonometri, ilmu fisika, ilmu kimia, > ilmu perbintangan, ilmu fisika, ilmu kimia, ilmu faal > dan matematika sebelum zaman industri. > > Ia juga mengatakan, pecahan persepuluhan bukan suatu > penemuan orang Barat dan bahwa itu ditemukan oleh > seorang ilmuwan Muslim. Ia juga menambahkan, sistem > biner, adalah juga ditemukan oleh seorang ilmuwan > Muslim. > > Dr. George Saliba, adalah Profesor Ilmu pengetahuan > Islam-Arab. Selain itu ia juga duduk di Departemen > dari Timur Tengah dan Bahasa-bahasa Asia, di Columbia > University, New York, AS. > > Sebelum Saliba, orientalis asal Skotlandia, William > Montgomery Watt pernah secara jujur, bagaimana Barat > sangat berhutang budi pada Islam, khususnya dalam > pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan. > > Montgomery yang pernah mendapatkan gelar "/Emiritus > Professor/," gelar penghormatan tertinggi bagi > seorang ilmuwan, sangat tekun melakukan penelitiannya > tentang Islam. Khususnya sejarah perkembembangan > pengetahuan di dunia Islam. Montgomery secara jujur > mengakui, perkembangan ilmu pengetahuan yang kini > berkembang pesat di Barat dan Eropa, sesungguhnya > sebagian besar telah banyak ditemukan kaum Muslim > sebelumnya. > > <http://hidayatullah.com/>] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.24/1117 - Release Date: 07/11/2007 22:52 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
