Dawahganda
Argument
Premises
1) Qur’an states burnt skin in hell will be
renewed to feel pain
2) Receptors/Nerve-ends in the Skin are
responsible for pain
2.1) Severe burns damage
Receptors/Nerve-ends and cause loss of pain sensation
3) Dr. Tagata Tagasone stated no 7th
century person can know (2) & (2.1)
Conclusion
Therefore, the Qur’an references
pain receptors/Nerve endings in the skin (before anyone knew)
Source for Argument
Quran & The sensory characteristic of the skin
Zakir Naik – Pain Receptors in the Qur’an
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_PK-PUltLE
Verses
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ بِـَٔايَٰتِنَا سَوْفَ نُصْلِيهِمْ نَارًا كُلَّمَا نَضِجَتْ جُلُودُهُم بَدَّلْنَٰهُمْ جُلُودًا غَيْرَهَا لِيَذُوقُوا۟ ٱلْعَذَابَ
(Pickthall Translation)
04:56 - Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment.
(Transliteration)
04:56 - Inna allatheena kafaroo biayatina sawfa nusleehim
naran kullama nadijat julooduhum baddalnahum juloodan ghayraha
liyathooqoo alAAathaba
For other translations, visit http://quranx.com/4.56
Objections
The goal of
the present dawahganda argument is to suggest that the Qur’an foretold the
existence of nociceptors/pain receptors/nerve endings responsible for the
sensation of pain. Thus, there are 2 claims needing examination; whether the
Qur’an references nociceptors and whether what is presented in the Qur'an can
qualify as scientific foreknowledge.
The
following objections are raised against the dawahganda argument;
1. Pain receptors/Nerve endings are inferred rather than
explicitly mentioned
2. The information is accessible through direct observation
in 7th century
3. The role of nerve-endings in skin were known or theorized
prior to the Qur’an
4. Evidence from the practice of cauterization
5. Appeal to Dr. Tagata Tagasone is a false & fallacious
argument from authority
1. Pain
receptors/Nerve endings are inferred rather than explicitly mentioned
The
argument is based on an inference rather than any explicit mention
of the proposed scientific foreknowledge. The verse in question is Sura 04:56
and the phrase under discussion is “change
[burnt skin] for other skins that they may taste the
punishment” ( بَدَّلْنَٰهُمْ جُلُودًا غَيْرَهَا لِيَذُوقُوا۟ ٱلْعَذَابَ).
The verse,
describing punishments in hell, states that once the skin of an individual is
burnt, it is replaced with a new skin in order for the person to continue feeling
pain. Thereupon, the dawahgandist infers that if the burnt skin is not replaced, the individual would not feel pain.
Thereafter,
the dawahgandist draws upon the fact that the reason the person would not feel
pain is due to the burning away of nociceptors/pain receptors/nerve endings
responsible for the sensation of pain. This fact is then used to finally infer
that the Qur’an refers to the existence of nociceptors/pain receptors/ nerve
endings responsible for the sensation of pain.
Thus, there
are 2 separate inferences that need examination; (it is vital to understand
that the following 2 inferences are distinct and should not be conflated);
a) “Qur’an refers to the loss of sensation caused by severe
burns”
b) “Qur’an refers to the existence of nociceptors”
1.a) “Qur’an refers
to the loss of sensation caused by severe burns”
In contrast
to most dawahganda arguments, the inference (a) is relatively reasonable. The phrase under discussion could
very well have been uttered by its author with this knowledge in mind; i.e.
the knowledge that severely burnt skin can lose the sensation of pain and
touch.
However, as a point of interest, it is to be noted that it
is possible for the author to state the phrase without this knowledge in mind.
For example, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, the renowned 12th century Islamic
exegete, states the following regarding this verse,
“It is possible for it to be said that this is a metaphor for eternity and a lack of cessation, as is said of something that is meant to be described as eternal: “every time it ends it has begun, and every time it reaches its endpoint it starts from the beginning.” Likewise is (Allah’s) statement: “Every time their skins are burned out, we shall exchange them for new ones,” meaning, every time they think they are completely roasted and burned through and will cease into complete destruction, we give them new strength of life so that they think they are now renewed and replenished. So what is meant by this is to exemplify the eternity of punishment and complete lack of its cessation.”[i]
From the
above example, it is, at least, conceivable that Muhammad could utter the
phrase under discussion as a metaphor for the perpetuity of tortures in hell;
without the knowledge of inference (a).
Thus, even if it is the case that the knowledge presented in inference (a) was unknown at the time of
Muhammad, the Skeptic of dawahganda are still within reasonable limits to
dismiss any case of alleged scientific foreknowledge.
Nevertheless,
it will be presumed, for the sake of argumentation, the author of the verse possessed
and intended to use the knowledge presented in inference (a). However, it will be demonstrated in Objection (2) that this
argument fails to qualify as scientific foreknowledge.
1.b) “Qur’an refers
to the existence of nociceptors”
The second
inference (b), unlike inference (a),
is weak. If the dawahgandist had no prior knowledge of nociceptors, he/she
would not have been able to derive the concept of pain receptors/sensors from
the phrase under discussion. The dawahgandists can only infer that there exists
some property of the skin that holds it responsible for the sensation of pain.
However, it is not within the scope of the verse to describe what the nature of
this property could be. Thus, the claim that the Qur’an refers to the existence
of nociceptors is false. Unsurprisingly, the dawahgandist method has been to
conflate and equate the two distinct inferences.
Nevertheless,
the present dawahganda argument reduces to the claim that the Qur’an foretold
that severe burns cause loss of sensation. However, this phenomenon is directly
observable and thus it fails to be scientific foreknowledge.
2. The information is
accessible through direct observation in 7th Century
The innocuous
refutation for this naive dawahganda argument is unwittingly found in the very
sources that make this claim. Consider, the following statement by Zakir Naik;
"Without the pain receptors, the human being cannot feel pain. That is the reason, whenever a patient, a burn injury, comes to the doctor, he takes a pin and pricks it in the area of the burn ... If the patient does not feel pain, then the doctor is sad. The pain receptors have been destroyed. It is a deep burn."[ii]
The notable
irony here is that Zakir Naik, in an attempt to present scientific
foreknowledge, revealed that modern science was not necessary for an average
human being to know that severe burns cause loss of sensation. It seems that to
know this information, all that is necessary is a person with a severe burn and
a ‘pricking’ object; neither of which was unavailable in 7th century
or before.
The
objection can be more lucidly expressed as the following syllogism;
1) Those who have severe burns know severe burns cause loss
of sensation.
2) (Some) People before 7th century had severe
burns.
Therefore, (Some) people before 7th century knew
severe burns cause loss of sensation
For a
dawahgandist to maintain that this information was inaccessible for Muhammad,
he/she has to believe that no person before the 7th century suffered
from a severe burn. Of course, such a belief is inductively weak.
Thus,
the claim that this information was unknowable to Muhammad is false on its face
value.
3. The role of nerve-endings in skin were known
or theorized prior to the Qur’an
Additionally,
it is also false that no one knew or proposed theories about the relationship
between the sensation of pain and the nerve-ends in the skin. For instance, Prof.
E.K. Emilsson, a philosopher and historian, notes the following view of the 2nd
century physician, Galen,
"Galen refers to the relation between the brain and the nerves that lead from the sense-organs to the brain ... He also says that vision works like touch, which operates through the nerves from the surface of the body to the brain; the idea being the sensitive air close to the color seen is analogous to the nerve-ends in our skin."[iii]
Prof.
Maxwell Bennet, a neuroscientist, states the following regarding Galen
understanding of sensation and the causes for its loss;
“Galen had already established that nerves arise from the brain and spinal cord, that conduction of psychic pneuma is necessary in these nerves for sensation and motor action for if they are cut or damaged there is no sensation of movement and that there are two classes of nerves, one motor (if damages no motor action) and the other sensory (if damaged no sensation).”[iv]
Furthermore,
according to Prof. Howard Smith and Prof. Steven Passik, “Galen was one of the first to conceptualize the physiology of
nociception when he described pain as a response to events that occurred
outside the body.”[v]
Galen was
among many others who theorized about or experimented with the field of
sense-perception. Other individuals include Plotinus,[iii] Eristratus, Herophilus[vi]
etc. Therefore, it is blatantly ignorant to claim that no humans could know
the relationship between skin and pain sensation.
4. Evidence from the
practice of cauterization
Cauterization
was a widely prevalent practice of antiquity where wounds and amputations were
treated with the branding of fire or heat. The practice was also prevalent in
the times of Muhammad as recorded by several Hadith.[vii] [viii]
It can be
induced that due to the prevalence in antiquity of this practice of burning
individuals for therapeutic purposes, those living in ancient times are even more
likely to learn that severe burns cause loss of sensation.
5. Appeal to Dr. Tagata
Tagasone is a false & fallacious argument from authority
Last and
definitely the least, the dawahgandist’s consistent appeal to Dr. Tagata
Tagasone is a false & fallacious argument from authority. Given that it has
been demonstrated that the Qur’an neither refers to nociceptors nor present any
scientific foreknowledge, the statements attributed to Dr. Tagata Tagastone are
false and an apologist’s continued appeal to his authority is fallacious.
On a side
note, Dr. Tagata Tagasone is yet another scientist from the infamous Zindani affair. Several of the other scientists named in this propaganda project had declared that they were misrepresented and quote-mined. Therefore,
it is to be suspected that the same is the case with Dr. Tagata Tagasone.
Overall, it
may also be noted that dawahgandists presenting this argument have entirely hung its
validity on the shoulders of Dr.Tagata Tagasone rather than justifying the
inference made or the foreknowledge alleged. Thus, this argument can be seen as
a textbook case of the fallacy of arguing from authority.
Conclusion
The Qur’anic
verse in question can only be said to refer to the fact that severe burns cause
loss of sensation. However, this is merely an observable phenomenon. The
alleged reference to nociceptors cannot be inferred from the verse without the
prior assumptions on the part of the apologist. Furthermore, thinkers before
Muhammad’s time, such as Galen, had already expressed views on the role of
nerve-ends in the skin for sensation; thereby falsifying the claim that this
piece of information was unknown to those in antiquity. Additionally, it is
induced from the practice of cauterization i.e. burning for therapeutic purposes, that those in antiquity are more likely to learn that severe burns cause loss
of sensation. Finally, the statements attributed to Dr. Tagata Tagasone are
empirically false and the apologist’s appeal to his statements is a textbook
example of the fallacy of arguing from authority.
[i]. Fakhr
al-Din al-Razi. Mafatih al-Ghayb, Tafsir
al-Kabir. Accessed online at http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=4&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=56&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1
(translation via @happymurtad)
[ii]. Zakir Naik. Zakir Naik claims Pain Receptors are foretold in the Qur'an.
(Begins at 00:30). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_PK-PUltLE
[iii]. Emilsson, E.K. Plotinus on Sense-perception: A Philosophical Study. CUP Archive,
1988. page 59. (Accessed via Google Books. URL: http://books.google.com/books?id=3z09AAAAIAAJ&dq)
[iv]. Bennet, Max R. History of Synapse. CRC Press. 2003. Page 3. (Accessed via Google
Books. URL: http://books.google.com/books?id=DEJIoSbAKRoC)
[v]. Smith, H. & Passik, S. Pain and Chemical Dependency. Oxford University
[vi]. Rey,
R. The History of Pain. Translated by
J. A. Cadden, L.E. Wallace, S. W. Cadden. Harvard University
[vii]. Muhammad acknowledges the healing ability of
cauterization but forbids this practice as recorded in Sahih Bukhari Book 76,
Hadith 24 (http://sunnah.com/bukhari/76/24)
[viii]. Muhammad or his companions practicing cauterization as recorded in Sunan
ibn Majah Book 31, Hadith 3619 (http://sunnah.com/urn/1275350),
Jami’ at-Tirmidhi Book 28, Hadith 2188 (http://sunnah.com/urn/673530),
Sunan abu Dawud Book 29, Hadith 12 (http://sunnah.com/abudawud/29/12),
Additional links
Articles & Blogs
1. Responses to "It is Truth" Chapter 8 On the Sensory Characteristic of the Skin
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/It-is-truth/chap08.htm
