A Critique of Darwin’s The Descent of Man by a Muslim Scholar in 1912: Muḥammad-Riḍā Iṣfahānī's Examination of the Anatomical and Embryological Similarities Between Human and Other Animals

Journal of the History of Biology 54 (3):485-511 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The cliché of the clergymen or the religious scholars battling against modern science oversimplifies the history of the encounter between modern science and religion, especially in the case of non-Western societies. Many religious scholars, Muslim and Christian, not only did not oppose modern science but used it instrumentally to propagate their religions. Marwa Elshakry, in her brilliant study of Darwin's opinions among the Arab World, concentrates more on Arab Christians and Sunni Muslims rather than on Shiite Muslims. Muḥammad-Riḍā Iṣfahānī, a Shiite clergyman educated in Islamic theology in Najaf, composed A Critique of Darwin's Philosophy in 1912 as a review of the theory of evolution. However, even before the publication of this book, controversy concerning this topic had been raging in the Arab World for decades. Under the influence of Muslim scholars (Sunni and Shiite) to reconcile modern science with Islam, Iṣfahānī did his best to gather knowledge of modern biology. He applied his self-taught knowledge of modern biology to find new solutions to the difficulties of establishing a dialogue between Islam and modern science. Thanks to the rationalism of his premodern scientific education, Iṣfahānī was more sympathetic towards science than many of his Arab counterparts and able to deeply engage in these debates. Iṣfahānī believed that the theory of evolution in nonhumans did not contradict Islamic discourse nor experimental and rational facts. Nevertheless, he denied the theory of human evolution as a nonscientific hypothesis. He justified his opinion through a detailed refutation of Darwin's heuristic evidence for human evolution in the first chapter of Descent of Man, such as the similarities between anatomy, embryology, and vestigial organs in humans and other animals. He also referred to other Western evolutionists of his time, such as Alfred Russel Wallace and Rudolf Virchow, who also rejected human evolution, and added some other scientific refutations of his own. Undoubtedly, Iṣfahānī's final aim was to demonstrate the possibility of reconciliation between religion in general, and Islam in particular, with modern science. This article provides a detailed consideration of Iṣfahānī's opinions, identifying his Arabic sources and comparing them to the original non-Arabic sources. I also examine the scientific details of Iṣfahānī's achievements and the roots of his misunderstandings.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Human and the Animal: Explanatory Commensurability in Darwin’s The Descent of Man.Teófilo Espada-Brignoni - 2015 - Circumscribere: International Journal for the History of Science 16:1-16.
The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex.Charles Darwin - 1898 - New York: Plume. Edited by Carl Zimmer.
The descent of man.Charles Darwin - 1874 - Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. Edited by Michael T. Ghiselin.
Darwin's Beautiful Notion: Sexual Selection and the Plurality of Moral Codes.Jason A. Tipton - 1999 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 21 (2):119 - 135.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-07-02

Downloads
29 (#535,100)

6 months
13 (#185,110)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex.Charles Darwin - 1898 - New York: Plume. Edited by Carl Zimmer.
The origin of species.Charles Darwin - 1859 - New York: Norton. Edited by Philip Appleman.
Evolution: The History of an Idea.Peter J. Bowler - 1985 - Journal of the History of Biology 18 (1):155-157.
Evolution: The History of an Idea.Peter J. Bowler - 1987 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (2):261-265.

View all 10 references / Add more references