PHYSICS, TECHNOLOGY AND CIVILIZATION
Prof. M. Rafat
Adam Publishers, New Delhi, India
2014
Pages 200 (Hardback)
Rs. 260
Reviewed by KHAN YASIR
Prof. M. Rafat, author of the book under study, is a leader of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind – a movement that aspires for regeneration of Islamic “civilisation” in its pristine glory. He has done his PhD in “Physics” from Indian Institute of “Technology” (IIT), Kanpur. Who could have been a better person to write on the theme of Physics, Technology and Civilization – the say-it-all title of the work?
The author tends to argue that ideas emanating from Physics have had a remarkable impact on popular imagination and even worldviews. And civilisation is the visible manifestation of a worldview. Relationship between technology and civilisation is evident – as “technology serves the objectives of a civilisation” (p. 20) – but the author emphasises that relation of technological progress with human happiness and welfare is not straightforward or linear.
Chapter zero is dedicated to defining the three terms. The author mentions that besides the obvious meanings of physics (knowledge of natural things); technology (practical use of scientific ideas) and civilisation (human social development); the point should be kept in mind: “Beyond the core… there is a vast potential for elaboration, development and extension, leading to ever new formulations and applications… the key terms are not closed or frozen concepts. They do not resemble a store house which contains a lot of useful material but has no room for new objects. Rather, they resemble a growing tree in which new leaves and branches may appear and which periodically blooms deriving sustenance from its environment; nevertheless, it can always be recognised as this or that particular tree.” (p. 15)
And this he does especially with the term of civilisation. Citing various sources, he claims that civilisation has been defined as “a stage of society” and this formulation assumes a very linear view of history. He argues that civilisation can be referred to as a “stage” of society only in technological sense. “In the ethical sense,” he writes, “civilisation is a “state” of development; to be achieved and maintained by sustained conscious effort.” (p. 25)
Chapter one, “Conceptual Apparatus of Physics” is too physical for a dumb like me. I can only request the author on behalf of all those who even find it tough to read an-idiot’s-guide-to-physics to simplify this chapter a little bit by explaining more.
Chapter two is based on a critical appraisal of Samuel P. Huntington’s theory of clash of civilisations. This is a “myth” or at least a skewed interpretation of reality. Dr. Rafat’s views can be summed up as: “…to regard conflict as the most important form of civilisational interaction is hopelessly narrow and Huntington’s emphasis on it is certainly not warranted.” (p. 55)
Chapter three, entitled “Science and values”, arrives at the conclusion that every ‘knowledge’ is value-laden. And science is not an exception. It is not (and it never was) value free.
Chapter four “Civilisational Transition” is one of the most important chapters of the book. In this chapter, through the example of 1857 war of independence and Muslim participation in the freedom struggle, the author has tried to contextualise the decline of Muslim civilisation in India.
The author’s observation is noteworthy when he states, “With the loss of the Muslims’ self-confidence, their efficiency dwindled. They became preoccupied with unhealthy mysticism, occult practices, shallow philosophical doctrines, decadent literature and trivial hobbies (like kite flying and chess). As a result, the Muslim society no longer produced able administrators, brave soldiers, competent chieftains, skilled artisans, and critical scholars. Instead all that the declining society had to offer were otherworldly mystics, magicians, jugglers, sycophants, musicians, dancers and poets.” (p. 71-2)
He concludes the chapter on the following note, “…the Muslim community has to “rediscover” itself. Is it a minority in the democratic cage or is it a segment of the global community? The implications of the two self images are quite different!” (p. 74)
Chapter five discusses the technological progress and hurdles in its way especially in the Indian context. Among several shortcomings that he points out are non-recognition of group rights (to the extent that it should be) and persistence of illiteracy. He gauges the so-called population-problem from a new angle as he says, “The large scale migration to the big cities is the root cause of severe problems associated with overpopulated cities” and these problems “are superficially blamed on the growth of population itself.” (p. 83)
Chapter six exposes the noble principles under whose pretext contemporary imperialism is making its advances namely Liberalism, Human Rights protection, Democracy, Elimination of terrorism, and Nuclear free world, etc.
The author also tries to problematise the idea that a world-empire necessarily means imperialism. He points out, “It may be remembered that the Muslims had also established a world empire at one time and a global civilisation; but in this empire, no region was exploited. Resources were not transferred from other regions to Arabia. People were not crushed, subjugated or enslaved. It was a global empire on the basis of equality, brotherhood and respect for human dignity irrespective of race or religion.” (p. 93)
However, when the author states that today the world is moving towards a global state, I find it a notion difficult to agree with. In my view, if the distinguished author subscribes to this view in defiance of the whole logic of multi-polarity on one hand and neo-colonialism on the other (implying that imperialistic states are willing to exploit without taking responsibility to govern the colonised) – he should have elaborated his views at some length.
Chapter seven deals with the question of affirmative action and debates its logic, necessity and required measures.
Chapter eight and ten deal with Arab Spring where the author pens the obvious, “Freedom is not merely the absence of slavery. In the context of a society, its independence does not merely imply the absence of (direct or indirect) colonial rule. Rather freedom has a positive content… This content has three components; cultural, political and institutional.” (p. 106)
How this obvious fact is so obnoxiously ignored by the rulers of Arab countries? The author confesses that revolutions by their very nature are “singular and rare occurrences” that “seems to defy routine logic” but actually they are “culmination of normal historical processes” (p. 117-8).
This normal process of history and not some spontaneous reaction resulted in Arab Spring. In the ecstasy of Arab Spring the author moves his pen further to draw home a point, “The masses have already rejected the puppet rulers, they must also reject their foreign mentors, and alien ideologies.” (p. 108)
Chapter twelve too discusses the notion of revolution and social change.
Chapter nine entitled aptly as “Turkish civilisational misadventure: the imprint of imperialism” – discusses Turkish imperialism under Mustafa Kemal. The author dissects different tools of imperialism. For example, he states, “When a generation becomes alien to its own worldviews and values; it has, for all practical purposes, been killed. Thus, education proved to be a lethal weapon in the hand of imperialists.” (p. 110)
The key question however is: why Mustafa Kemal did what he did? The author’s observations despite not being ‘revealing’ are worth quoting verbatim, “…Kemal was probably repelled by the decadent religion represented by most of sheikhs, peers and self styled custodians of faith. Their religion is enveloped in ignorance, darkness and blind obedience to their mentor, the sheikh. As Kemal had no knowledge of authentic faith, he revolted against religion, as such. To save the Muslim world from (the) Kemals of future, one must discover the real authentic religion and seek commitment to it.” (p. 116)
Chapter eleven and thirteen deal with technology. The former discusses the neutrality of technology – a notion that the author falsifies. The latter concentrates on technology and self-reliance. Here the author laments over the bias towards “controlled experiment” over “experience”. He states, “…an agriculture scientist’s suggestions are entertained with reverence; while an illiterate farmer’s ideas (backed by centuries of experience in the field) are treated as unscientific.” (p. 146)
At the end of the chapter the author makes a succinct point, “People self-reliant in thought and knowledge would naturally plan and devise strategies to become self-reliant in economy, technology and means of communication.” (p. 150)
Chapters that follow discuss some crucial questions like: The problem of uncertainty; The norms needed for a global society; The elusive peace; The conflict with nature; The distribution of resources (Chap 14); how justice and durable peace is possible (Chap 15); and how can an atmosphere of dialogue (instead of either conflict or hypocrisy) can be created (Chap 16).
The author declares, “…while we may certainly try persuasion to bring people towards our viewpoint; it should be clear that we have no right to coerce people or to compel them by force to accept an opinion. We are of course free to present our suggestions but let us also realise that others are equally free to reject them.” (p. 168)
Chapter 17 i.e. “How the laws of physics operate?” problematises some “realities” that we often take for granted. While exclusively relying on L.A. Tarasov and R.P. Feynman, the author concludes, “…the existence of a law governed universe does not automatically rule out the role of God, in determining the course of events happening in the universe.” (p. 173)
This observation removes the so-called contradiction between natural and supernatural, Science and God. “One must conclude that the outcome of the operation of a physical law is not unique; it may vary if initial conditions are varied (by an intelligent agency).” (ibid)
The significance of this debate compels me to suggest that the author should have elongated it further by citing more approving scientists and philosophers and also critically dealing with their critiques. It would have also helped the curious to pursue the topic further.
Chapter 18, last but certainly not the least, is an apt conclusion to a book which is so varied in its argument that some may complain of it going off-the-track sometimes. The concluding chapter advocates a universal civilisation. On what basis? According to the author, human beings have four dimensions of relationships namely relation… 1) with the Creator, 2) with self, 3) with other human beings, and 4) with things.
The author eloquently concludes: “A proper cultivation of relations with the Creator, with one’s own self, with other human beings and with material objects is the necessary requirement of the healthy growth of individuals and society. We all have to ensure that we recognise the essence of our humanity and seek to safeguard it and nurture it. If we succeed in being human, even seemingly minor actions of ours would achieve greatness and would make the world a better place; the dream of universal civilisation would then be realised.”
Beautifully designed in hardcover and provided with an extensive bibliography, the beauty and utility of the book is marred by a poor index. Still, a must read for students of both natural and social sciences!