Dr. Mohd Zaidi b. Ismail
Fellow Kanan
No one would dare dispute the central role of reading and thinking in nurturing a scientific culture which is conducive to the development of a nation.
Though their roles are indisputable, people at large still need to be reminded of their importance because of the inherent tendency in man to forget and neglect.
On Sept 13, speaking at the Centennial Celebration Dinner of the MPH Group in Petaling Jaya, the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Mohd. Najib Abdul Razak, urged Malaysians to embrace reading as part of their lifestyle to become a truly knowledge-based society. Once reading becomes part of one's life and forms a natural habit, the acquisition of knowledge becomes easy, he further remarked.
About two weeks earlier, while launching the Tan Sri Dr Noordin Sopiee Chair on Global Studies at Universiti Sains Malaysia Penang, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi highlighted that universities should not merely be mills churning out human resources necessary for the country but, more importantly, they should create thinkers who can analyse various issues, big and small, across geographical borders and academic disciplines.
One theme appears central in such reminders. That is, the relation of reading and thinking to knowledge. So, the discourse somehow boils down to that concerning knowledge and the culture of learning.
In this context, the writings of Wan Mohd Nor b. Wan Daud, Penjelasan Budaya Ilmu (An Elucidation of the Scientific Culture), is as relevant to us today as it was when it first saw the light of the day about 15 years ago (Since then, it has undergone four reprints).
Yes, reading and thinking are rendered meaningful only in the context of knowledge and knowing. One cannot enjoin them without, at least, alluding to their instrumentality in the process of the acquisition of knowledge, regardless of the kind of knowledge involved.
Suppose that knowledge were not well-appreciated in a society, will reading and thinking be valued therein as well?
Suppose that knowledge is confused with information, or is considered to be synonymous, will thinking then be as important as reading, if not more?
For Muslims, thinking is part of their religious duties. In fact, it is inconceivable that somebody be referred to as a true Muslim without him even thinking correctly.
One simply has to heed the famous dictum "There is no religion for one who has not intelligence (and therefore, reason)" (La diina li man la `aqla lahu).
As such, in addition to the factor of puberty, one only starts to be held responsible in terms of religion when one is possessed of a minimal discriminatory faculty (al-mumayyiz). And this faculty is described by Muslim scholars in basic logical terms: one's ability to discern the difference between what is necessary, what is impossible, and what is possible.
It has therefore become an established norm in the Islamic intellectual tradition for scholars to begin their treatises on theology and other religious creeds with elaborate epistemological preliminaries.
It is in those preludes on the theory of knowledge where one finds, among others, extensive discussions on knowledge and thinking. Thinking, though only one of the many channels through which knowledge is attained, is an important means.
What is this act called "knowing" then? It is not a bodily act although its acquisition process may involve certain usages or functions of our bodily organs. On the contrary, it is considered a mental act, an act of one's mind. But an act of what?
One good account given to explain what the mental act of "knowing" is, is its description in kinetic terms. Knowing is thus described as the mind's movement from "what-has-already-been-known" to "what-is-still-unknown."
Such, in fact, is not merely a description but also serves as a guiding epistemic principle. For, in knowing, one cannot start from either what is unclear or what one is ignorant of, using it to grasp what is clear and understandable.
It is in this light that "thinking" is described as "the mental act of (1) putting into a meaningful order (2) what one has already known in order to (3) attain what one is still ignorant of." It is indeed a brief description; yet, it is comprehensive.
Those well-exposed to the science of thinking in the Islamic intellectual milieu, the science called `ilm al-mantiq, would not fail to notice the three central and constitutive elements embedded in such a description.
One constituent is the units of knowledge already in one's possession; what one has already known. This, in the descriptive and explanatory language of Muslim scientists and logicians, is regarded as the "material," or "matter," of thinking.
Another constituent is the way one mentally organizes those units of knowledge; the way one mentally relates one unit with another unit, or a group of other units of knowledge meaningfully. It is as if one here is talking about certain mental patterns, certain arrangements. Thus, this second constituent of thinking is considered to be the "form" of thinking.
The third constituent represents the noetic progress, the successful movement of one's mind to new units of knowledge (such as deriving right conclusions or making correct inferences) after the first and second constituents above have been obtained. This progress seems necessary once one's mind knows certain facts and manages to relate those facts correctly.
In short, thinking is like one putting the right form to the right material so that at last one will arrive at meaning. As such, defects in thinking may well be due to the defects in its material, or to those in its form, or to flaws in both.
As far as reading is concerned, it is one way to supply man with thinking materials. It is here that misinformation, or wrong inputs, lead to wrong inference, and worse still, fatal decision-making.
If one is stuck only with the informations thus supplied from one's readings, or at best, is only able to regain what one has gathered earlier from one's readings, with no progress made in understanding, then one is not thinking, but is simply recollecting or memorizing or remembering.
Yet, quality reading as well as correct thinking are two undeniable components in inculcating the culture of knowledge and science in our society. And every party in this country must be serious about reading and thinking if we are serious about becoming a truly knowledge-based society.
Though their roles are indisputable, people at large still need to be reminded of their importance because of the inherent tendency in man to forget and neglect.
On Sept 13, speaking at the Centennial Celebration Dinner of the MPH Group in Petaling Jaya, the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Mohd. Najib Abdul Razak, urged Malaysians to embrace reading as part of their lifestyle to become a truly knowledge-based society. Once reading becomes part of one's life and forms a natural habit, the acquisition of knowledge becomes easy, he further remarked.
About two weeks earlier, while launching the Tan Sri Dr Noordin Sopiee Chair on Global Studies at Universiti Sains Malaysia Penang, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi highlighted that universities should not merely be mills churning out human resources necessary for the country but, more importantly, they should create thinkers who can analyse various issues, big and small, across geographical borders and academic disciplines.
One theme appears central in such reminders. That is, the relation of reading and thinking to knowledge. So, the discourse somehow boils down to that concerning knowledge and the culture of learning.
In this context, the writings of Wan Mohd Nor b. Wan Daud, Penjelasan Budaya Ilmu (An Elucidation of the Scientific Culture), is as relevant to us today as it was when it first saw the light of the day about 15 years ago (Since then, it has undergone four reprints).
Yes, reading and thinking are rendered meaningful only in the context of knowledge and knowing. One cannot enjoin them without, at least, alluding to their instrumentality in the process of the acquisition of knowledge, regardless of the kind of knowledge involved.
Suppose that knowledge were not well-appreciated in a society, will reading and thinking be valued therein as well?
Suppose that knowledge is confused with information, or is considered to be synonymous, will thinking then be as important as reading, if not more?
For Muslims, thinking is part of their religious duties. In fact, it is inconceivable that somebody be referred to as a true Muslim without him even thinking correctly.
One simply has to heed the famous dictum "There is no religion for one who has not intelligence (and therefore, reason)" (La diina li man la `aqla lahu).
As such, in addition to the factor of puberty, one only starts to be held responsible in terms of religion when one is possessed of a minimal discriminatory faculty (al-mumayyiz). And this faculty is described by Muslim scholars in basic logical terms: one's ability to discern the difference between what is necessary, what is impossible, and what is possible.
It has therefore become an established norm in the Islamic intellectual tradition for scholars to begin their treatises on theology and other religious creeds with elaborate epistemological preliminaries.
It is in those preludes on the theory of knowledge where one finds, among others, extensive discussions on knowledge and thinking. Thinking, though only one of the many channels through which knowledge is attained, is an important means.
What is this act called "knowing" then? It is not a bodily act although its acquisition process may involve certain usages or functions of our bodily organs. On the contrary, it is considered a mental act, an act of one's mind. But an act of what?
One good account given to explain what the mental act of "knowing" is, is its description in kinetic terms. Knowing is thus described as the mind's movement from "what-has-already-been-known" to "what-is-still-unknown."
Such, in fact, is not merely a description but also serves as a guiding epistemic principle. For, in knowing, one cannot start from either what is unclear or what one is ignorant of, using it to grasp what is clear and understandable.
It is in this light that "thinking" is described as "the mental act of (1) putting into a meaningful order (2) what one has already known in order to (3) attain what one is still ignorant of." It is indeed a brief description; yet, it is comprehensive.
Those well-exposed to the science of thinking in the Islamic intellectual milieu, the science called `ilm al-mantiq, would not fail to notice the three central and constitutive elements embedded in such a description.
One constituent is the units of knowledge already in one's possession; what one has already known. This, in the descriptive and explanatory language of Muslim scientists and logicians, is regarded as the "material," or "matter," of thinking.
Another constituent is the way one mentally organizes those units of knowledge; the way one mentally relates one unit with another unit, or a group of other units of knowledge meaningfully. It is as if one here is talking about certain mental patterns, certain arrangements. Thus, this second constituent of thinking is considered to be the "form" of thinking.
The third constituent represents the noetic progress, the successful movement of one's mind to new units of knowledge (such as deriving right conclusions or making correct inferences) after the first and second constituents above have been obtained. This progress seems necessary once one's mind knows certain facts and manages to relate those facts correctly.
In short, thinking is like one putting the right form to the right material so that at last one will arrive at meaning. As such, defects in thinking may well be due to the defects in its material, or to those in its form, or to flaws in both.
As far as reading is concerned, it is one way to supply man with thinking materials. It is here that misinformation, or wrong inputs, lead to wrong inference, and worse still, fatal decision-making.
If one is stuck only with the informations thus supplied from one's readings, or at best, is only able to regain what one has gathered earlier from one's readings, with no progress made in understanding, then one is not thinking, but is simply recollecting or memorizing or remembering.
Yet, quality reading as well as correct thinking are two undeniable components in inculcating the culture of knowledge and science in our society. And every party in this country must be serious about reading and thinking if we are serious about becoming a truly knowledge-based society.
No comments:
Post a Comment