جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "modern science" در نشریات گروه "تاریخ"

ore than two centuries have passed since the introduction of modern sciences, especially the Newtonian astronomy, into the Islamic world and Iran. The historiography covering the period of opposition until widespread acceptance of modern astronomy by the Shi’ite clergy, should be persued with utmost care and meticulous examination of written evidence and material culture. This period includes the transition from the belief in the centrality and fixity of the earth, assumed not only in the Ptolemaic system but also in other cosmographies of the Islamic era, to modern cosmology. In the last few decades, historians of science have made various comments about this period. Seyyed Hossein Nasr talks about wholesale surrender of  Islamic scholars when facing Western science without launching any criticism. On the other hand, Gamini, a historian of science, maintains, by separating the mainstream Shi’ites from the Shaykhiya and the Sufis, that there were different reactions by these groups towards modern science. Unlike the Shaykhiya and Sufis, the opposition of the mainstream scholars towards modern astronomy was not due to religious dogmas, but it took place only on philosophical grounds. One of the Shi’ite ulama, who had a completely critical view of modern science, was Muḥammad al-Ḥusayn al-Kāshif al-Ghitāʾ. In his writings from the time of Constitutionalism and the following decades, he especially opposes modern astronomy and Darwin's theory of evolution. Gamini has advanced a different reading of the writings of Kashif al-Ghita. In the present article, the contentions that Gamini has expressed in recent years, especially in his new writings, regarding the confrontation of the Shi’ite ulama with modern astronomy, are challenged here. It is argued that they are either anachronistic or rely on the false assumption that the opposition of the mainstream Shi’ite scholars to modern astronomy was solely or mainly related to their philosophical considerations rather than religious objections. In addition, the incorrectness of Gamini’s assertion that Kāshif al-Ghitāʾ only objected to the evolution of humankind and was generally sympathetic towards Darwin’s theory of evolution will be shown

Due to the military and economic threats of modern civilization, the Qajar rulers were forced, at some stages, to adapt new sciences and techniques to modify and refurbish parts of their state administration. In addition, due to the acquaintance of Iranians with new changes and modern thoughts of this period, critical thoughts and progressive discourses were formed in society. Printed in Kolkata during the ending decades of Qajar era, Habl al-Matin was one of the most important newspapers which used to emphasize the adaptation of modern sciences in its progressive discourse. Based on a descriptive-analytical method and through a paradigm of critical theory, it has been tried, in present study, to criticize the approach of this newspaper to progress and modern sciences to find answers to these fundamental questions of what were the shortcomings and problems of Habl al-Matin to explore the relation between progress and modern sciences and what was its "of-modern-sciences- derived" solution to get development? Findings show that Habl al-Matin did not have a comprehensive understanding of new civilization and the ways it developed on the basis of dialectical relation of political, economic, social and cultural changes and processes, and it tried, through a positivist approach, to explain the advancement of Europe and all other societies using modern sciences, and it propagated the adoption of these sciences as a strategy for the Iran's progress, regardless of the necessity of making changes and creating capacity for bringing the country's different structures together and forming appropriate processes.

The introduction of modern science in the Qajar era is invariably connected to the efforts of Najm al-Dawla. But why modern science did not rise in Iran despite the high development of science in pre-modern times? And why did it not find acceptance in Iran when it was first introduced? In this article the importance of Needham’s question for the historiography of science is briefly discussed as well as some attempts by Western scholarship to answer it. By considering the traditional methodology of science, as expressed by Kātibī Qazwīnī in al-Risala al-Shamsīyya that had been taught in Iran until recently, it will be argued that this methodology was not suitable for developing or embracing modern science, in particular, the Newtonian mechanics. Finally, as an example, some arguments against heliocentric astronomy based on the logic of al-Shamsīyya, and advanced by Muḥammad-Ḥusayn Shahristānī in his Āyāt Bayyināt will be discussed.