According to Mufti, Science cannot prove or disprove the Gods because science deals with the physical world or if we further steel-manning the Mufti Logic we can say science depends on observation and measurement and God is beyond physical measurement, therefore science cannot be used to prove the God. Apart from it, scientific claims must be testable and falsifiable,
For examples
example 1
“This pen is blue.”
you look at the pen. if it is red, the statement is wrong.
so it can be caught lying.
This is falsifiable.
example 2
“This pen is blue, but only when nobody looks at it.”
Now you can never check it.
This is not falsifiable.
Science deals only with falsifiable claims.
There is another quality of Science that can explain only how nature works, not ultimate purpose, hence Mufti is right when he says science cannot be used to prove or disprove God. But wait, the problem is much more complex than it looks on the surface.
Flaw in Mufti Reasoning: – Though god is not a physical identity and scientific tools cannot be used to detect it or decipher it. But when Non Physical God tried to interfere with the Physical world, God became subject to scientific enquiry.
Hence the statement – “There is a God” is different from “God created this universe.” The Former statement is beyond the scope of Science but the Later statement is very much within purview of Science. Mufti’s statement “Science cannot be used to prove or disprove god” is only conditionally true, it applies only to non-interacting, non-empirical god concepts, it fails the moment God is claimed to act in the physical world or become creator.
Bertrand Russell wrote “that once religions make claims about origins of the universe or human history, they step into scientific territory and must face scientific scrutiny.”
Science is in core of Logic
There are different kinds of logic. The premise is the foundation of logic. A premise can be drawn from personal experience or scientific inquiry. For example, if you say, “There are clouds, so it can rain,” it is the true Logic. You need not conduct any Scientific experiment to see the relationship between cloud and rain. It is part of our daily experience.
But the problem begins when you say: that “every living being feels pain,” you are not stating a directly observable fact. You need scientific inquiry to build a strong premise for that claim. Thus, the problem is often not with the logic itself, but with the premises upon which it is built. Therefore, saying that science and logic are different is incorrect.
For example, we once believed that time flowed at a constant rate. But now we know this is not true at a universal level. This scientific reality violates our “common sense.” If we ignore these scientific facts and rely only on casual observation to build our premises, the result will be false. This is precisely what happens with myths (or “mufti”).
Science precedes logical premises. Logical Process is merely the application of scientific facts.
Here critics may argue that logic exists independently of science, they can cite rules like the Law of Non-Contradiction or the truths of mathematics. But they forget that every ‘logical’ truth began as an observation. A child learns that two and two make four not through divine intuition, but through the physical interaction with objects. We will discuss the problem in a later part also. We accept the Law of Non-Contradiction not because it is a holy rule, but because our ancestors observed through millions of years of scientific trial and error that a predator cannot be both absent and present.
What we call ‘Logic’ is simply the collection of scientific observations that are so ancient and so consistent that we have forgotten they are observations at all. Science is the foundation; Logic is just the memory of what Science has already proven.”
So the Scientific method cannot be excluded from Debate, because science is the foundation of our Logic. Hence when Mufti said he will accept only Logic as source of Knowledge, he cannot separate Science, otherwise his premises will only be either observation or imagination and both have their own limit.
Note:- Content of Article is taken from wrtier of thia article and book Book title Mufti Shamail VsJaved Akhtar’s Debate,Who Won, Who Lost?
Book Link:- https://www.amazon.it/dp/B0GDWN281D, This book is Also available on Google Play Book.
