Page last edited on 12 March, 2003
In science, and especially in physics, concepts are defined in
mathematical language. In this way we might say that knowing the maths of a
theory is possible. However, are mathematical statements truths? Their claim to
universality is based on the definition of concepts through axioms that are
‘such obvious concepts’ that they must be universal. However since they only
describe themselves they are not in any real sense true; they do not claim to
describe some universal physical existence. The role of maths is to provide
abstract objects that we can use as tools in our reflections on our observations
of reality. They do not of themselves provide knowledge of reality.
The use of the word ‘knowledge’, in the sense of knowing
something means it must be true, makes the idea of a framework for the sources
of knowledge seem over-ambitious or at least the sources in this framework
don’t seem to be genuine sources. Observation and reason are not sources of
‘knowledge’ but instead should be considered as routes to better
understanding which only reach ‘knowledge’ when pursued to their ultimate.
Nevertheless I shall continue to refer to observation and reason as ‘the
sources of knowledge’ in anticipation of applying a more appropriate meaning
to the word ‘knowledge’.
Continue to ...
[ 01- The Basis of Knowledge ] [ 02 - The Sin of Disbelief ] [ 03 - The Amazing Quran ] [ 04 - The Teachings of Islam ] [ Table of Contents ]