Deification of Science

For collection of articles on this theme, see Deification of Science

Zaman, Asad (2015) Deification of Science and its Disastrous Consequences, International Journal of Pluralism in Economics Education, Vol 6, No.2, 181-197

See also commentary in blog post by: David Bradley

Link to earlier versions, with ideas for other versions of this paper

Serious problems with existing methodology for science publications are identified in: "Trouble at the Lab" problems in replicability of scientific research.)

Work of John P. A. Ioannidis shows that most medical research is plain wrong, and at the same time is widely in use by professionals who do not realize this.

Another study on How Extremely Bad Research gets published. Science under Capitalism

A lecture based on this article, entitled: A New Methodology for Islamic Economics, was presented at the 17th DL course on Islamic Economics offered by IRTI, IDB, Jeddah.

A more recent article bypasses the arguments and history of this paper and goes straight to the heart of the matter: Scientific Methodology fails in Social Science because human beings are free. See An Islamic Approach to Humanities.

For related articles, see LINK on sidebar entitled Social Sciences

An interesting and related article by Sheikh Umer Vadillo is called :Science Does Not Think" this is attached at bottom of page.

Deification of Science and its Disastrous Consequences.

Three different methodologies are suitable for three different fields --- math, physical science and social science. Borrowing social science methodology from Physical sciences leads to unacceptable results; it is has its own natural methodology which necessarily involves a normative element. This allows for straightforward and easy introduction of Islamic ideas into social science.

FOR full paper, DOWNLOAD attachment DOS2.doc from bottom of page. Abstract of the paper and references are given below:

Abstract: Our goal is to show that production of knowledge requires different approaches in different areas. In particular, radically different methodologies are suitable for mathematics, science, and humanities. Currently, it is widely believed that “methodology of science” is unique and the only way for production of valid knowledge. This imperialist epistemology is wrong and has caused a lot of harm.

10. References

Agassi, Joseph (2009). ‘Current Philosophy of Science’, Philosophy of the Social Sciences 20 (10), p. 1–17.

Ayer. A. J. (1936) (1971). Language, Truth and Logic. Penguin Books: Harmondsworth.

Ayer, A.J. Interview: “It was all wrong” www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cnRJGs08hE

Bauman, Z. (2000). Modernity and the Holocaust. Cornell University Press.

Blaut, James M. (2000) Eight Eurocentric Historians, Guilford Press, NY.

Cartwright, Nancy (1983) How the laws of physics lie. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Chittick, William C (2007) Science of the cosmos, science of the soul: the pertinence of Islamic cosmology in the modern world. Oneworld Publications Ltd.

Elmarsafy, Ziad. The Enlightenment Qur'an: the politics of translation and the construction of Islam. Oneworld Pubns Ltd, 2009.

Friedman, Milton (1953), "The Methodology of Positive Economics," in Essays in

Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 3-43.

Gatto, J. T. (2002). Dumbing us down: The hidden curriculum of compulsory schooling. New Society Pub.

Goody, Jack. The theft of history. Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Hands, D.W. (2009). “Philosophy of Economics”, Uskali Mäki (ed.), Vol. 13 of D. Gabbay, P. Thagard and J. Woods (eds.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. Elsevier: Oxford.

Hausman, D. M. and McPherson, M. S. (2006). Economic Analysis, Moral Philosophy, and Public Policy. Second Edition, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge

Hoppe, Sherry L., and Bruce W. Speck. (eds.) Searching for spirituality in higher education. (2007). Peter Lang Publishing.

Karacuka, M and A. Zaman (2013) “The Empirical evidence against neoclassical utility theory: A review of the literature,” International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education

Kung, Hans (2006) Does God Exist? An Answer for Modern Times, Wipf & Stock Publishers. translated from German.

Manicas, Peter T. A history and philosophy of the social sciences. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987.

Michell, Joel. "The Quantitative Imperative Positivism, Naive Realism and the Place of Qualitative Methods in Psychology." Theory & Psychology 13.1 (2003): 5-31.

Olson, Richard. Science Deified & Science Defied: The Historical Significance of Science in Western Culture. Vol. 2. Univ of California Press, 1995.

Powers, Richard (1999) “Best Idea: Eyes Wide Open,” New York Time April 18, 1999. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/18/magazine/best-idea-eyes-wide-open.html

Putnam, H. (2002). The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy and other essays. Harvard University Press.

Rashid, Salim (2009). ‘Underdetermination, Multiplicity, and Mathematical Logic’, draft, available from http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00004905/

Reuben, Julie A. (1996) The making of the modern university: Intellectual transformation and the marginalization of morality. University of Chicago Press, 1996.

Robbins, Lionel (1935), An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science.

2nd Edition, London: Macmillan and Co. [1952 printing].

Taleb, N. N. (2010). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. Random House Trade Paperbacks.

Tuchman, Barbara W (1985) The march of folly: From Troy to Vietnam. Ballantine Books.

Van Fraassen, Bas C. The scientific image. Oxford University Press, USA, 1980.

Zaman, A. (2012) “The Normative Foundations of Scarcity,” Real-World Economics Review, issue no. 61, 26 September 2012, pp. 22-39

Zaman, A. (2013) “Islamic Approaches to Fundamental Economic Problems,” to appear in Oxford Handbook on Islam and the Economy, eds. Kabir Hassan & Mervyn Lewis.