Review of the Main Themes
Both studies under consideration are dedicated to identifying the relations between religion and science from various perspectives. At this point, the first article called Islam, Fatalism, and Medical Intervention: Lessons from Egypt on the Cultivation of Forbearance provides an alternative view on the role of religious “fatalism” in advancing or hampering social, scientific, and technological progress.
The author redefines the existing notions and tries to highlight the actual reasons for the Muslim people’s reluctance to undergo medical treatment. The second article called Islam, Procreation and the Law discusses the moral and religious codes with regard to the notions of reproduction and sexuality treated from a historical perspective.
It also presents how religious views on reproduction and abortion influence legal issues in the Islamic countries. Despite different angles reviewed in the articles, they both provide a religious and historical insight in the current problems of medical treatment and health among the Muslim. In addition, they also reveal how religious and moral codes relate to social and legal issues.
The Main Ideas of the Articles
While representing the main ideas in the articles, both authors rely on historical resources and introduce an ethnographical approach to studying the problems. At this point, the author sheds light on different religious ideologies to infer an alternative definition of the religious “fatalism” with reference to such concepts as religious steadfastness and divine will.
In this respect, Hamdy argues, “it is critical to unpack the various implications of the charge of fatalism as well as the social realities that it masks for a better understanding of the practices of both Islam and biomedicine”.
Looking from this perspective, religion is not a potential constrain to medical interventions and social progress, but people’s reliance on the so-called “comfort mechanism”. Because of poverty and poor social conditions, the Muslims strive to appease and, as a result, they oppose treatment.
Similar to Hamdy, Sachedina also refers to historical and religious background to provide explanation for current issues related to human health. Specific attention, however, is paid to the way religion influences the current state of social and legal perception of reproduction, abortion, and sexuality. While referring to history and exploring the main provisions of Quran, the author builds a solid foundation for further discussion.
The major differences between ideas representation lies in the extent to which the authors rely on primary sources, such as Quran and other first-hand documents. At this point, Hamdy focuses more on scientific works and theoretical frameworks represented by other scholars in the field of research.
By referring to scientific works, the author argues, “faith in divine will has often been interpreted as passivity, inaction, or false consciousness – a functionalist mechanism to alleviate poverty and suffering”. In contrast, Sachedina relies heavily on primary documents to make a statement about the concept of reproduction and sexuality: “Within the confines of marriage, sexuality is treated as one of the good things in life that a Muslim should enjoy. Marriage is commendable and is recommended for whoever can afford it”. Consequently, reference to diverge resources identifies author’s attitude toward the role of science and religion in social life.
Confrontation between Religion and Science: Main Assumptions and Key Considerations
While estimating the role of religion in social and cultural life of the Muslim people, both articles reveals the rigid confrontation between religious ideologies and biotechnological progress. At this point, Hamdy discusses the role of religious “fatalism” with regard to terminally ill patients and re-orients the analysis to the way religious traditions disguise the social realities: “religion is assumed to be a tool of manipulation by the powerful to keep the disadvantaged downtrodden”.
Similar to the first study, Sachedina considers religion the major challenging factor affecting social and legal spheres of life in the Eastern countries. In particular, the author underscores, “Islam is a comprehensive system that regulates the spiritual as well as civic aspects of individual and communal life”.
Quran is considered to be the major source of laws dictating the behavioral patterns and providing different perceptions of such medical and biological interventions as contraception, abortion, and sterilization.
Deep philosophical analysis has been represented in both studies to define what aspects of religion have a potent impact on the development of current scientific and technological issues, as well as how religious tradition challenges the current development of biotechnology.
In this respect, both authors have reached a consensus concerning false interpretation of the sacred book generating more misconceptions with regard the evaluation of medicine, science, and technology.
While addressing historical sources and interpreting relevant passages from first-hand documents, Hamdy recounts the case in which a patient Muhammad agreed to have dialysis procedures and rejected to transplant another kidney because of the God’s will: “For Muhammad… pain was not an abhorrence to be eliminated at all costs…some pain was regarded as a blessing, as a reminder of God, and as something for which to be thankful”.
Hence, the author expresses his concerns with the way religious tradition manipulates people’s lives. The expectations also create challenges for legal issues in Islamic world. Within this framework, Sachedina underlines, “…Muslim countries have constitutional provisions indicating that Shari’ah is either “a source” or “the source” of legislation”.
With regard to the previous article, the given study is more focused on estimating the value of the Quran and religious schools in considering and justifying different issues related to women’s health and reproduction.
On the one hand, both studies provide a heavy criticism of Islam as the major constraint in advancing science and technology and promoting social welfare. On the other hand, both authors attain much importance to Quran as the solid foundation of ethical and moral codes being congruent with contemporary outlooks on health issues.
To enlarge on this point, Hamdy notes that religion and spiritual foundations do not actually disapprove medical intervention, but interpret those as God’s will as far as the transplantation is concerned. Because of misinterpretation, many Muslim people believe, “transplantation could not possibly be pleasing to God”.
At the same time, thee author represents another experience approving of transplantation and explaining that “…God had given our bodies as a trust (amana) and that he was therefore responsible to take care of it”.
Representing this case enables to assert that sacred documents are often interpreted with regard to social changes to adapt to the ongoing environment. Sachedina also makes use of similar statement while considering the role of place of religion in shaping legal platform in the Muslim world.
At this point, the author explains the divergence in school of thought by various interpretation of Islam while considering the problem of contraception: “family planning…is occasioned by the people’s own choice and conviction, without constraint or compulsion… on the condition that the means for effecting this planning is legitimate”.
In this respect, the existence of different religious schools proves once again that sacred documents have controversial passages that can be misinterpreted and can challenge the scientific and technological progress.
The challenges created by religious tradition are discussed in terms of different philosophical and ethical issues. At this point, Hamdy believes, “…many ill patients drew on Islamic theological notions of faith in the face of suffering as redemptive of past sins or heedlessness of God”.
Disease, therefore, is not considered as a biological disorder, but a spiritual phenomena, God’s will. Religious, but not physiological, interpretations are also approved people while discussing the problem of procreation and sexuality. Judging from these considerations, both authors have provided a clear distinctions between religious ideologies and anti-science movements due to the diverse purposes followed by each one.
Evaluating the Main Strengths and Weaknesses: Competitiveness of the Cases
An in-depth evaluation of key considerations outlined in the studies, specific emphasis should be placed on the arguments and evidence that authors apply to make the case valid and reliable. At this point, Hamdy discloses his perception of religion and its relation to medicine with regard to personal encounters with people undergoing medical treatment.
By analyzing their vision on Quran provisions and personal perception of religion, the researcher has successfully managed to define how misconceptions emerged, as well as in what ways religion is used as powerful source of social manipulation.
In contrast to this study, Sacheldina introduces historical information from the primary sources and discusses the way different theorists interpret Quran. Within this framework, the research proves to be consistent, valid, and argumentative because each concept and notion is premised on factual information and solid evidence.
Conclusion
Both research studies under analysis represent a deep ideological, theological and ethical discourse in the medical treatment and biotechnological progress. Though the authors approach the discussion of Islam and its influence on social and health care environment from different angles, their assumptions are closely associated.
At this point, Hamdy reveals Islamic influence on social reality, as well as analyzes how a religious disposition influences the patient’s decision to refuse to transplant organs. At this point, many patients consider God’s will as the basic ethical and philosophical foundations shaping their attitudes to life.
At the same time, Hamdy withdraws religion and faith as the basic reasons for foreclosing medical intervention. Instead, he places an emphasis on circumstances, contexts, and conditions under which the patients make decision premised on God’s will.
In contrast, Sachedina directly addresses the religious texts to explain the existing legal and ethical issues related reproduction and contraception. The author makes a conclusion that the sacred book represents specific assumptions that can be variously interpreted with regard to constantly changes social and cultural backgrounds.
At this point, the author proves that Quran does not provide a unanimous answer concerning the negative attitude of Islam to the contraception and reproduction. Unlike the first study, the author highlight the importance of adhering to moral and theological principles in Quran and adapt those to the modern environment.
Bibliography
Hamdy, Sherine F. “Islam, Fatalism, and Medical Intervention: Lessons from Egypt on the Cultivation of Forbearance,” Anthropological Quarterly 82 (2009): 173-196.
Sachedina, Zulie “Islam, Procreactiona and the Law,” International Family Planning Perspectives 16.3 (1990): 107-111.