More on this book
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
July 12 - August 14, 2024
Theologically, the fitrah is the natural state or the innate disposition of the human being that has been created by God with innate knowledge of Him and with the affinity to worship the Divine.[109] This is based on the authentic statement of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ which states, “every child is born in a state of fitrah. Then his parents make him a Jew, a Christian or a Magian….”[110]
Rational arguments serve as spiritual and intellectual awakenings to realise the knowledge that is contained in our fitrah.
“Indeed, you do not guide whom you like, but God guides whom He wills. And He is most knowing of the [rightly] guided.”
“The infinite is nowhere to be found in reality. It neither exists in nature nor provides a legitimate basis for rational thought… the role that remains for the infinite to play is solely that of an idea.”
Underdetermination is a “thesis explaining that for any scientifically based theory there will always be at least one rival theory that is also supported by the evidence given…”
If someone can claim that the entire universe can come from nothing, then the implications would be absurd.
Individuals who argue that something can come from nothing must also maintain that something can vanish from no causal conditions at all.
The quantum vacuum is something; it is not an absolute void and it obeys the laws of physics. The quantum vacuum is a state of fleeting energy. So it is not nothing, it is something physical.
Understanding the concept of creation leads us to conclude that self-creation is a logical and practical impossibility. This is due to the fact that self-creation implies that something was in existence and not in existence at the same time, which is impossible.
Jubayr ibn Mut’im. When he heard the relevant verses of the Qur’an addressing this argument he said, “my heart almost began to soar.”
What it implies is the ability to realise every possible affair. Omnipotence also includes the impossibility of failure.
an infinite amount of falling dominoes would take an infinite amount of time to fall. In other words, the last domino would never fall.
the hard problem of consciousness.
ontological
Eliminative materialists assume everything can be explained via physical processes, and do not accept that subjective conscious states exist.
Functionalists postulate that consciousness is defined as the functions or roles it plays, emerging from a set of relations within an organism or system, just like a computer. A function is defined as a relation of inputs, mental states and outputs.
I cannot know what it is like for someone else to experience the feeling of being threatened by a dangerous animal. Understanding
A variant of weak emergent materialism maintains that we will never understand all of the physical processes that underpin subjective consciousness. However, theoretically speaking, if we were ever to have a perfect understanding of how the brain works, we could understand subjective consciousness.
This approach does not explain the hard problem of consciousness, as it admits that it cannot be explained. In my view this is no different to saying, “It just happens. It is so complex that no one knows.”
different substances: one is physical and the other is non-physical. These substances are fundamentally distinct and exist independently
A key objection to substance dualism is that since conscious states and the brain are radically different, then knowing how they interact is impossible. This is known as the interactionist problem;
Where did the immaterial substance come from? How does it exist in the physical universe?
With this theory, conscious states are distinct from physical states, and physical states cause conscious states, but not the other way around.
Firstly, there is an absence of evidence for the claim that matter contains subjective consciousness. Protons, electrons, quarks and atoms do not exhibit any signs of having subjective consciousness.
Firstly, it answers a question that none of the existing views have answered: Where did consciousness come from?
the minute someone adopts the chance hypothesis as an argument, it opens the door to anyone claiming anything they want to claim.
If we require an explanation for the basic assumptions of science—for example, that the external world exists—where do you think our level of scientific progress would be? Additionally, if we were to apply this type of question to every attempted explanation, we would end up with an infinite regression of explanations,
In the context of the design argument, the ‘god of the gaps’ objection carries little weight. Here are four reasons why:
the scientific data we have accumulated thus far, a designer is actually the best explanation for the universe’s design, but there’s still some hope that in some unspecified future, scientific progress will refute the design argument.
This objection is based on a flawed assumption that the whole universe is supposed to exist for human habitation.
objective means that morality is not dependent or based on one’s mind or personal feelings.
The underlying character of moral language implies something universal and external.”
Is something morally good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is morally good?
existence of multiple creators is impossible because there can only be one will.
The first scenario implies only one will manifests itself. The second scenario means that there is no will in action. This is not possible because there must be a will acted upon, as we have creation in existence. The third scenario ultimately describes only one will. Therefore, it is more rational to conclude that there is only one creator because there is only one will.
For two creators to exist, they must be different in some way.
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate’; in English: ‘Plurality should not be posited without necessity.’
Science has a particular scope. It focuses on the physical world, and can only address natural processes and phenomena.
Philosophical naturalism cannot adequately explain the hard problem of consciousness (see Chapter 7), the finitude and dependency of the universe (see Chapters 5 and 6), the fine-tuning of the laws and the order in the universe (see Chapter 8), the existence of objective morals (see Chapter 9) and much more.
As evolutionary biologist Scott C. Todd said, “the scientist, as an individual, is free to embrace a reality that transcends naturalism”[348]
“Be mindful of God, you will find Him before you. Get to know God in prosperity and He will know you in adversity. Know that what has passed you by was not going to befall you; and that what has befallen you was not going to pass you by. And know that victory comes with patience, relief with affliction, and ease with hardship.”[451]
‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, one of the Muslim leaders, wrote to his agent in Iraq: “Search for the people of the covenant in your area who may have grown old, and are unable to earn, and provide them with regular stipends from the treasury to take care of their needs.”[527]
The key reason the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was able to directly influence such tolerant and compassionate societies was because affirming the Oneness of God, pleasing and worshipping Him, was the spiritual and moral basis of his life and the lives of those who loved and followed him. This provided timeless, objective moral grounding to achieve what the 18th century economist Adam Smith claimed was the first nation: “…under which the world enjoyed that degree of tranquillity which the cultivation of the sciences requires….”[549]
To know God means that we affirm that He is the sole creator and maintainer of everything that exists (known as Oneness of God’s Lordship). It also entails that we affirm His names and attributes in the context of recognising that they are unique and that nothing can compare to God (known as Oneness of God’s Names and Attributes). Knowledge of God also involves that we must know that He is unique in His Divinity; He alone is entitled to all acts of worship (known as Oneness of God’s Divinity).
“This one prostration which you deem too exacting liberates you from a thousand prostrations.”[593]
