the light
08-09-2001, 08:07 AM
by Yamina Bouguenaya
Durham University
..............
It is clear that none of these substances possess any characteristics that are their own and are directly their own property. Why then, although this is a fact, do the science books say that they carry out these functions themselves? Why, through expressions like “the plant produces its own food,” “chlorophyll captures the energy in the sunlight. The compound ATP stores some of this energy within itself,” “the rest of the captured energy divides the water between the oxygen and hydrogen,” is it shown the plants, chlorophyll, ATP and sunlight do these things themselves?
These books have been written by materialist scientists. Due to their prejudice, they deny the existence of a Creator who creates everything. They look at the universe as though there was no Creator. They discover the order in the universe, everything of which was created within an order. Since the order was created together with particular causes and particular effects, they observe that a particular cause is together with a particular effect. Looking at events with the preconception of there being no Creator, they are compelled to assert that the causes make the effects. Since they consider the causes to possess the perfections observed in the effects, they state that as in the example above, the chlorophyll, sunlight, water, and so on, possess attributes like infinite knowledge, will, power, and compassion. And this is to attribute the attributes of Godhead to causes.
To ascribe even the least effect, which is the work of will and power, to causes, which are themselves in need of being made and possess neither intelligence, nor consciousness, nor will, nor power, —let alone Divine attributes— is “delirious raving.”4
The Qur’an states as follows that it is impossible to ascribe divinity to any being other than the Single Creator, Who continuously creates all things:
Yet they have taken besides Him, gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection.5 * Do they indeed ascribe to Him as partners things that can create nothing, but are themselves created. * No aid can they give them, nor can they aid themselves!6
If there had been any being other than God that possessed the attributes of divinity, it certainly would have intervened in creation and dominicality, and the order of the universe would have been spoilt. But just as the perfect order in all things from the tiniest fly and a particle in the pupil of an eye to the solar system shows that causes are not effective, so it testifies clearly to the existence and unity of a Necessarily Existent One.
Materialist science is based on a negative approach
Scientists have never at any time or in any way been able to prove that causes have a true effect, and they cannot prove it. They are aware of this. It is therefore not possible to prove that causes have an effect. Even if it was proved in principle that they do not have an effect, since up to now no one has been able to prove it, they say that the thesis that causes have an effect is an accepted truth.
To take our example, materialist scientists say that causes like sunlight, water and air, etc. are effective factors in the formation of nutrients. And to “prove” this they deprive a plant of water or sunlight, and demonstrate that it withers up and dies; that is, that photosynthesis is not carried out, and therefore nutrients not produced. Thus, they say, if there is no water or light, the nutrients are not produced. And going on from this “if there is no” they reach the conclusion that “water or sunlight produces the nutrients.” They suppose that in this way they have proved their thesis.
If it is noted carefully, it is seen that this is a negative approach; it is not a proof.7
On pressing the on/off button on a television, a picture appears on the screen. Whenever we press the button, the picture appears. While if we do not press it, there is no picture. According to the logic of the negative approach of materialist scientists, “the button makes the picture on the screen.” And the “proof” of this is that the picture does not appear when the button is not pressed. They do not think that the broadcasting is done outside, and it is not the button that does it. The button is merely part of the order of the television equipment. The person who made the television intentionally situated the button in the apparatus so the picture would appear on the screen. What logic is there if someone was to tell you that if you do not accept that the button produces the picture, make the picture appear without pressing it? The order and system of the television makes it impossible to work it without pressing the button. Because it was not made in that way. If the person says to you when you cannot make the television work without the button “There you are! It’s the button which makes the picture,” you would only laugh at the person.8
..........................
click for whole text
http://www.nur.org/treatise/articles/cause_and-effect_in_the_risale_i_nur.htm
Durham University
..............
It is clear that none of these substances possess any characteristics that are their own and are directly their own property. Why then, although this is a fact, do the science books say that they carry out these functions themselves? Why, through expressions like “the plant produces its own food,” “chlorophyll captures the energy in the sunlight. The compound ATP stores some of this energy within itself,” “the rest of the captured energy divides the water between the oxygen and hydrogen,” is it shown the plants, chlorophyll, ATP and sunlight do these things themselves?
These books have been written by materialist scientists. Due to their prejudice, they deny the existence of a Creator who creates everything. They look at the universe as though there was no Creator. They discover the order in the universe, everything of which was created within an order. Since the order was created together with particular causes and particular effects, they observe that a particular cause is together with a particular effect. Looking at events with the preconception of there being no Creator, they are compelled to assert that the causes make the effects. Since they consider the causes to possess the perfections observed in the effects, they state that as in the example above, the chlorophyll, sunlight, water, and so on, possess attributes like infinite knowledge, will, power, and compassion. And this is to attribute the attributes of Godhead to causes.
To ascribe even the least effect, which is the work of will and power, to causes, which are themselves in need of being made and possess neither intelligence, nor consciousness, nor will, nor power, —let alone Divine attributes— is “delirious raving.”4
The Qur’an states as follows that it is impossible to ascribe divinity to any being other than the Single Creator, Who continuously creates all things:
Yet they have taken besides Him, gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection.5 * Do they indeed ascribe to Him as partners things that can create nothing, but are themselves created. * No aid can they give them, nor can they aid themselves!6
If there had been any being other than God that possessed the attributes of divinity, it certainly would have intervened in creation and dominicality, and the order of the universe would have been spoilt. But just as the perfect order in all things from the tiniest fly and a particle in the pupil of an eye to the solar system shows that causes are not effective, so it testifies clearly to the existence and unity of a Necessarily Existent One.
Materialist science is based on a negative approach
Scientists have never at any time or in any way been able to prove that causes have a true effect, and they cannot prove it. They are aware of this. It is therefore not possible to prove that causes have an effect. Even if it was proved in principle that they do not have an effect, since up to now no one has been able to prove it, they say that the thesis that causes have an effect is an accepted truth.
To take our example, materialist scientists say that causes like sunlight, water and air, etc. are effective factors in the formation of nutrients. And to “prove” this they deprive a plant of water or sunlight, and demonstrate that it withers up and dies; that is, that photosynthesis is not carried out, and therefore nutrients not produced. Thus, they say, if there is no water or light, the nutrients are not produced. And going on from this “if there is no” they reach the conclusion that “water or sunlight produces the nutrients.” They suppose that in this way they have proved their thesis.
If it is noted carefully, it is seen that this is a negative approach; it is not a proof.7
On pressing the on/off button on a television, a picture appears on the screen. Whenever we press the button, the picture appears. While if we do not press it, there is no picture. According to the logic of the negative approach of materialist scientists, “the button makes the picture on the screen.” And the “proof” of this is that the picture does not appear when the button is not pressed. They do not think that the broadcasting is done outside, and it is not the button that does it. The button is merely part of the order of the television equipment. The person who made the television intentionally situated the button in the apparatus so the picture would appear on the screen. What logic is there if someone was to tell you that if you do not accept that the button produces the picture, make the picture appear without pressing it? The order and system of the television makes it impossible to work it without pressing the button. Because it was not made in that way. If the person says to you when you cannot make the television work without the button “There you are! It’s the button which makes the picture,” you would only laugh at the person.8
..........................
click for whole text
http://www.nur.org/treatise/articles/cause_and-effect_in_the_risale_i_nur.htm