Elm (علم), A Science Of Pure Application

Part 1

In the previous video, we explored the concept of Ketab الكتاب, delving into its historical, sociological, and metaphysical dimensions. However, we left implicit a critical precondition that requires a more in-depth discussion. Our catalog frequently references this word, so we decided to prioritize concepts where the Quranic definition of ‘knowledge’ plays an essential role before addressing the tools used to define these major concepts. Typically, systems work in reverse; they first define the tools before addressing the concepts. However, the Quran’s approach is more intuitive—concepts presuppose their tools, and these tools anticipate the concepts where their best use lies.

Once an idea in the Quran is understood, the task becomes distinguishing and separating the components that form the entire intellectual complex. In other words, intellectual work begins after comprehension occurs (see, E.Cassirer 'Substance & Function'; 'Einstein's Theory Of Relativity Considered From the Epistemological Standpoint, Chp1). To fully understand what we often think we’ve grasped, we must also understand the conditions necessary for that understanding and the means by which it can be successfully reproduced. This is common in scientific epistemology, as knowledge is proven through reproduction—reintroducing the concept with the same constructive steps initially used, under varying conditions.

"He was truly blessed with ˹great˺ knowledge because of what We had taught him." (Quran 12:68)

ۚ وَإِنَّهُۥ لَذُو عِلْمٍۢ لِّمَا عَلَّمْنَـٰهُ

Knowledge is proven through application, which occurs in degrees, ranging from faculties over which we have little control to those over which we have absolute control. The former includes impressions such as sensations, perceptions, and memories; and although those require and presuppose complex mental faculties to even recognize them, we see that they take little to no effort; they just pop up. On the opposite side are data that require intellectual effort to access, such as pure mathematics, quantum mechanics, analytic geometry, or Hegel....

These fields of knowledge require construction and reason, going beyond sensory input. Tools are necessary to access them—one cannot understand quantum mechanics without concepts like ‘electrons,’ ‘photons,’ or ‘force fields,’ just as physics requires understanding ‘mass,’ ‘gravity,’ and ‘space-time.’ Science is often defined by how much it removes us from the sensory world and how much intellectual effort it demands. The higher we ascend, the sharper and more refined our tools must be. As Bradley observed (and Einstein later reinforced), we cannot separate concepts from their tools without losing our grasp on reality. This tautological approach, crucial to the theory of relativity, exemplifies how intertwined concepts and tools are, depending on our approach and circumstances.

This consideration revolutionized science, changing the course of history by emphasizing the inductive method. Arnold J. Toynbee criticized what he termed the ‘industrialization of historical thought’ and the extremes of applied sciences, noting that this shift was a consequence of the limitless potential it introduced into the field of knowledge.

"The industrialization of historical thought has proceeded so far that it has even reproduced the pathological exaggerations of the industrial spirit. It’s well known that individuals or communities whose energies are concentrated upon turning raw materials into light, heat, locomotion, or manufactured articles are inclined to feel that the discovery and exploitation of natural resources is a valuable activity in itself apart from the value for mankind of any results produced by the process. They are even tempted to feel it reprehensible in other people when they neglect to develop all the natural resources at their disposal." (Arnold J. Toynbee, A Study of History, p. 1, p. 32)

The expansion of our intuition’s inner space to involve configurations beyond classical Euclidean space parallels the expansion in actual space through colonial rule and resource exploitation. The shift toward empirical and applied sciences, and away from humanities like philology and history, cannot solely be attributed to economic shifts but also to the search for a field where our faculties could roam freely. In nature, the only restrictions we face are intellectual and instrumental—do we have the right tools to access the phenomena we seek? If today’s methods are insufficient, can they be sharpened? If tomorrow’s methods will be superior, we can predict their future distinction and the importance of nuances currently overlooked.

Every scientific revolution owes itself to changes in ‘method’ (as Cassirer emphasizes), not an increase in data. This is crucial to understanding ‘knowledge’ in the Quran, where it represents a method rather than an accumulation of information. Consider Solomon’s statement in verse 43 of Surat 27:

"And we were given knowledge from before, and we had been Muslims." (Quran 27:43)

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الرُّوحِ ۖ قُلِ الرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّي وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ الْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا

Here, the term ‘knowledge’ is used epistemologically, emphasizing method. Solomon’s expression suggests an understanding of the method rather than possessing all knowledge, which would be illogical.

"They ask you ˹O Prophet˺ about the spirit. Say, 'Its nature is known only to my Lord, and you ˹O humanity˺ have been given but little knowledge.'" (Quran 17:85)

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الرُّوحِ ۖ قُلِ الرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّي وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ الْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا

This verse highlights the Quran’s eternal perspective—mankind will always possess only a little knowledge, regardless of time.

"Those gifted with knowledge ˹clearly˺ see that what has been revealed to you from your Lord ˹O Prophet˺ is the truth, and that it guides to the Path of the Almighty, the Praiseworthy." (Quran 34:6)

وَيَرَى ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْعِلْمَ ٱلَّذِىٓ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ هُوَ ٱلْحَقَّ وَيَهْدِىٓ إِلَىٰ صِرَٰطِ ٱلْعَزِيزِ ٱلْحَمِيدِ

Again, knowledge is described as instrumental. While the phrase ‘those who were given knowledge’ might refer to recipients of previous revelations, the concept of Elm علم (knowledge) is broader here. Holy books are not mere conveyors of knowledge but structures that require Elm علم to access. The tools to access them are found within the texts themselves, similar to how an IKEA manual is found within the package. To activate the text, one must use the tools with which it was composed (its 'plan of construction')—understanding through reproduction.

All we need is to reach a certain level in the reading of the text at which one begins to discern the relation between the ideas therein; where one concept is found to imply or presuppose another, where one could tell what propositions would be contradictory and under what conditions we may or may not consider a proposition adequate or true (much as how in speaking your native tongue you instinctively know what not to say from a grammatical and structural standpoint'). Think of it by analogy to our senses; within the bounds of the book, a deep enough immersion into the text will have furnished in you what is equivalent to ‘sense-organs.’

You have a direct, deeper, and peripheral vision, the ideas feel vivid, vague, or dense, you have a sense of their time, their endurance, frequency, or associations, a sense of form, their similarity, differences, and commonalities, a sense of their potential, their possibility. This is nothing strange; we’re already familiar with this from language learning, where, in picking up a new language the rules are at first felt like laws, but once fluency is reached, no longer feel as such, but feel rather ‘orienting’ or ‘informing.’ Because, to understand the text, one must reproduce the same reasoning, the same thought process, the same mindset, the same understanding as went into the weaving of the material itself.

Thus, what one obtains from the text is something epistemic, methodological, a certain way of thinking about and composing; and it’s truly this that constitutes the idea of knowledge, in appropriately reproducing and reintroducing concepts to the situations in which they are demanded. This requires recognition, first of all, as to the nature of the situation, its form, and a general understanding of its foundations; but this recognition requires that one is acquainted with the form, with the elements of the situation, which requires intellection, a reading into and analysis of the situation, a building of contextual knowledge.

Follow me over to Part 2..