Islamic origins of the theory of evolution?

[dmitry]

In recent years Islamic apologists have expanded their usual arsenal in their "ALL SCIENSE COMES FROM ISLAM" argument by another name Nasir al-Din al-Tusi who suposedly came up with all the basic mechanisms of the theory of evolution 600 years prior to Darwin! "Tusi has realized that hereditary variation, when coupled with selection pressures of various environments, is what made evolution possible."

www.salon.com/2014/04/05/richard_dawkins_is_so_wrong_it_hurts_what_the_science_vs_religion_debate_ignores/

"In the 13th century, Shi’i Persian polymath Nasir al-din al-Tusi discussed biological evolution in his book “Akhlaq-i-Nasri” (Nasirean Ethics). While al-Tusi’s theory of evolution differs from the one put forward by Charles Darwin 600 years later and the theory of evolution that we have today, he argued that the elemental source of all living things was one. From this single elemental source came four attributes of nature: water, air, soil and fire – all of which would evolve into different living species through hereditary variability. Hierarchy would emerge through differences in learning how to adapt and survive. Al-Tusi’s discussion on biological evolution and the relationship of synchronicity between animate and inanimate (how they emerge from the same source and work in tandem with one another) objects is stunning in its observational precision as well as its fusion with theistic considerations. Yet it is, at best, unacknowledged today in the Euro-centric conversation on religion and science. Why?"

Yea it is also acompanied by the usual arguments that (evil) Christianity is against sciense while Islam IS sciense incarnate!

I honestly dont know what to make of it. Maybe someone here could make Tusis theory of evolution more clear to me, does he realy deserve the title "father of evolution" instead of Darwin?

[Mike D]

I hadn't come across Tusi before, but I must confess to a fairly lamentable ignorance on Islamic scholars. Thus, of myself I can't really respond to your question, except to share what I found while reading about him:

A 13th-Century Darwin?

[ignorantianescia]

It seems like typical Islamic science apologetic fluff, as you note. Mind that the "four attributes" actually feature speculation about how the four elements originated from a primordial proto-element; typical speculation in line with classical natural philosophy that doesn't imply biological evolution.

The description is so unspecific and disingenuously conflates the origin of elements and 'biological evolution' that it's very likely that the author is just blustering all the way through. Fellow contrarian Carrier uses similar posturing when he's on weak ground.

[domics]

What about what he writes on humans?
From Farid Alakbarli'article: "Tusi believed that humans were derived from advanced animals. He wrote about the different transition forms between the human and animal world, saying: 'Such humans [probably anthropoid apes] live in the Western Sudan and other distant corners of the world. They are close to animals by their habits, deeds and behavior.' Tusi said that humans are related to all living and inanimate creatures of Nature: 'The human has features that distinguish him from other creatures, but he has other features that unite him with the animal world, vegetable kingdom or even with the inanimate bodies.'"

Is there anything new compared with the previous philosophy? Is it possible that a Muslim at that time could write about a transition from animals to humans when the Quran is very clear about the creation of Adam?
But above all, is there someone who has access to the English translation of 'The Nasirean Ethics' by G.M.Wickens to check these quotes?

[gregmita]

Jul 9, 2016 11:25:21 GMT domics said:

What about what he writes on humans?
From Farid Alakbarli'article: "Tusi believed that humans were derived from advanced animals. He wrote about the different transition forms between the human and animal world, saying: 'Such humans [probably anthropoid apes] live in the Western Sudan and other distant corners of the world. They are close to animals by their habits, deeds and behavior.'

This could be interesting. We need more detailed context and a good translation to see exactly what he is saying here. It can be something about transitional forms, or it can be just a typical jibe about more primitive cultures of humans being closer to animals.

Jul 9, 2016 11:25:21 GMT domics said:

Tusi said that humans are related to all living and inanimate creatures of Nature: 'The human has features that distinguish him from other creatures, but he has other features that unite him with the animal world, vegetable kingdom or even with the inanimate bodies.'"

This looks like typical Aristotle with different levels of superset souls - human rational soul encapsulating sensitive animal soul encapsulating nutritive vegetable soul, etc.

Jul 9, 2016 11:25:21 GMT domics said:

Is there anything new compared with the previous philosophy? Is it possible that a Muslim at that time could write about a transition from animals to humans when the Quran is very clear about the creation of Adam?
But above all, is there someone who has access to the English translation of 'The Nasirean Ethics' by G.M.Wickens to check these quotes?

[domics]

Jul 9, 2016 14:50:39 GMT gregmita said:

Jul 9, 2016 11:25:21 GMT domics said:

What about what he writes on humans?
From Farid Alakbarli'article: "Tusi believed that humans were derived from advanced animals. He wrote about the different transition forms between the human and animal world, saying: 'Such humans [probably anthropoid apes] live in the Western Sudan and other distant corners of the world. They are close to animals by their habits, deeds and behavior.'

This could be interesting. We need more detailed context and a good translation to see exactly what he is saying here. It can be something about transitional forms, or it can be just a typical jibe about more primitive cultures of humans being closer to animals.

With Google Books this is the quote more like that I found: "Such are the peoples dwelling on the fringes of the inhabited world, like the negroes in the West (175) and others, for the movements and actions of the likes of this type correspond to the actions of animals." link. Note 175 should be (but I'm not sure not being in preview): "mdnand-11 sfidfin-11 maghrib. The reference is, of course, to Africa generally, albeit to North Africa in particular."link

Nothing about a physical transation/derivation from animals to men.

[ignorantianescia]

Yes, that is the very same note 175. I suppose the weird fi's in "sfidfin" should be u's with macrons, so it reads similar to as-sûdûn [?] maghrib, which means "the black people in/of the West/(North) Africa".