如果人是立法者,正如西方所主张的那样,那么他如何立法?他如何获得人类的知识?衡量实在的标准是什么?西方在把宗教从生活中移除——无论是作为知识来源还是作为方法——之后,提出了关于思维生产方式的方法论问题。西方给出的答案局限于两种学说:唯理论学说和经验论学说。 唯理论学说认为,思维先于实在。因此,它依赖理性而非感官作为知识的来源。该学说认为,理性——无论是通过直觉、演绎,还是通过天赋知识——才是确定性与实在的衡量标准,而不是经验或实验。 至于经验论学说,它认为感觉是产生思想的唯一来源。它还主张,所有先前的人类知识也都是通过实验和感觉获得的,是“后天的”(拉丁语:“来自后者”),而非“先天的”。依照经验论,形成了一种科学的实验方法。“经验论”(empiricism)一词源自古希腊语empeiria,意为“经验”,表明它依赖实验作为衡量实在与知识的标准。从经验论的观点出发,涌现出了若干哲学流派,它们影响了西方社会各体系的相关思想,例如唯物主义、功利主义、实证主义、实用主义等。从这一经验论视角出发,这些哲学流派相继产生。

If man is to be the legislator, as the West asserts, then how does he legislate? How does he derive his human knowledge? What is the criterion to measure reality? The West asked methodological questions, related to the productive way of thinking, after it removed religion from life, both as a source of knowledge and method. The West’s answer was restricted to two doctrines: the Rationalist doctrine and the Empirical doctrine. The Rationalist doctrine asserts that thinking is precedent over reality. So it depends on reason, as a source of knowledge and not the senses. The doctrine views that reason, whether by intuition or deduction or through innate knowledge, is a measure of certainty and reality, not experience or experimentation. As for the Empirical doctrine, it views that sensation is the only source to generate thoughts. It also asserts that all precedent human knowledge was also obtained through experimentation and sensation, “a posteriori” (Latin: “from the latter”) rather than “a priori.” In accordance with Empiricism, a scientific experimental method was formed. The word empiricism is derived from the ancient Greek word empeiria, “experience,” indicating its dependency on experimentation as a measure of reality and knowledge. From the empirical point of view, several philosophies emerged that influenced the thoughts related to systems of the society in the West. From this empirical view, the philosophies of materialism, utilitarianism, positivism, pragmatism and others emerged.

考虑到经验科学方法所取得的成就与发现，这些成就与发现推动了西方物质层面的文艺复兴，西方便将这一方法采纳为思维方式。它被奉为神圣不可侵犯的程度，成为唯一的思维基础和衡量现实的尺度。西方赋予科学思维在一切事务中的主导地位，并将其推广到所有研究领域，以至于某些与人、社会及其关系有关的知识，也依照这一经验科学方法进行，其基础是与牛顿力学相关的决定论。随着相对论、量子理论、非常规发现等其他事物的出现，人们开始质疑科学的确定性以及决定论。这为自二十世纪中叶起兴起的一场反对科学、经验方法和决定论的反革命铺平了道路。因此，一些西方思想家试图反驳科学及其显著的失败，特别是科学将人视为自然的、物质现象的观点。尽管如此，科学依然占据主导地位，在西方仍然掌控着知识的话语权。科学方法依然是衡量思维的标准、批判的准则和知识的基础。因此，西方所说的科学思维或批判性思维，指的仅仅是经验科学方法。

Considering the achievements and discoveries made by the scientific empirical method, that contributed to the Renaissance of the Western materially, the West adopted this method as a method of thinking. It was revered to the level of sanctity, making it the only basis of thinking and the measure of reality. The West gave scientific thinking dominance in all matters, generalizing for all research to the extent that some of the knowledge related to even man, society and its relations, is carried out according to this empirical scientific method, based on Determinism associated with Newtonian mechanics. With the emergence of the theory of relativity, quantum theory, unconventional discoveries and other matters, questions were raised against the certainty of science, as well as determinism. This paved the way for a counter-revolution against science, empirical method and determinism, from the middle of the twentieth century. So some of the Western thinkers attempted to refute science and its prominent failures, particularly with regards to its view of man as a natural, material phenomenon. Nevertheless, science has remained dominant, retaining dominance over knowledge in the West. The scientific method has remained as a measure of thinking, as a criterion for criticism and as a basis of knowledge. Thus by referring to scientific thinking or critical thinking, the West means the empirical scientific method alone.

事实上，西方的科学理论在两个方面都是无效的：一方面，从它作为知识本身而言是无效的；另一方面，从它被视为思维基础而言也是无效的。

In fact, the Western theory of science is invalid in two aspects: it is invalid from the aspect of it being a knowledge in itself. Also it is invalid from the aspect of its consideration as the basis of thinking.

至于将科学本身视为知识的这一方面，在西方的认知中便有此种观念。科学不仅仅是一种方法，更是一种有保障的知识，被视为人类理解的终极形态。实证主义学说的创立者奥古斯特·孔德（卒于1857年）提出了一套社会演化的理论，认为社会在追求真理的过程中要经历三个阶段，这是一条普遍的三阶段律。孔德所说的三个阶段是：（1）神学阶段，（2）形而上学阶段，（3）实证阶段，也称科学阶段。

As for the aspect of considering science as knowledge itself, it is found to be in the perception of the West. Science is not just a method but guaranteed knowledge, as an ultimate human comprehension. Auguste Comte (died 1857), the founder of the doctrine of positivism, offered an account of social evolution, proposing that society undergoes three phases in its quest for the truth according to a general law of three stages. Comte’s stages were (1) the theological stage, (2) the metaphysical stage, and (3) the positivity stage, also known as the scientific stage.

在神学阶段，人类通过超自然力量来解释自然现象，这些力量由众神来代表。在形而上学阶段，即探究阶段，人类开始推理和质疑，对自然现象进行追问，并质疑权威与宗教。在实证阶段，即科学阶段，人类依据经验方法来认识自然。他们借助这一方法来解释自然，并将实证知识表述为科学的、描述性的形式。正如奥古斯特·孔德所宣称的，这使人能够支配自然，控制自然并将其为己所用。然而，尽管科学有种种宣称与倡导，它却惨痛地失败了。科学没有为人提供关于其存在、其角色与目的的全面而包容的知识。相反，它只提供了物质主义的知识，催生了工业文明与后工业文明。它的特点在于对世界进行深入的定性与定量解释，从而促使人类利用自然。

During the theological stage, humans used to explain natural phenomena by way of supernatural powers, represented by gods. During the metaphysical stage, the stage of the investigation, humans started reasoning and questioning, questioning authority and religion, regarding natural phenomena. During the positivity stage, the scientific stage, humans learn regarding nature according to the empirical method. They explain nature through this method, formulating the positive knowledge in the scientific and descriptive forms. This enables man to dominate nature, controlling it and utilizing it for his purpose, as Auguste Comte claimed. However, science has failed miserably, regardless of claims and advocacy. Science did not provide man with comprehensive and inclusive knowledge about his existence, his role and objective. Instead, it only provided him materialistic knowledge that generated the industrial and post-industrial civilization. It is distinguished by its in-depth qualitative and quantitative explanation of the world, contributing to human beings utilizing nature.

然而,科学使人远离了对自我的认识,使他无法领会其人性的本质,并分散了他对自身存在与成长的理解。这是因为科学将人对其存在目的以及命运真相的探寻,仅仅视为哲学研究。科学把这种探寻归入宇宙论、本体论和形而上学的范畴。科学坚持认为,对物质现实的可感知认识是有限的,因而这种探寻无法得出结论,研究它也没有意义。因此,科学的性质是描述性的,从质和量两个方面定义世界。所以,科学更接近于描述而非诠释,因为诠释涉及超出描述范围的事务。诠释(tafseer)是研究现象存在的原因及其目的。科学的描述并不能为人提供对其自身现实的解释。这是因为科学忽视了对目的的阐释,它只从质和量两个层面分析世界,只能帮助人类从描述的角度理解世界,却不能为人类提供行为准则或关于目的的理念。无论其范围多么广阔,科学所提供的知识都只是部分的知识,仅与人的存在及其所处世界的某一部分相关。科学并未涵盖人生的全部现象和其存在的各个方面。安拉(SWT)说:

However, science has kept man away from knowing himself, comprehending the essence of his humanity and distracting him from comprehending his being and his becoming. This is because science considers the search of man for both his objective in existence and the reality of his destiny, as mere philosophical research. Science relegates this search to the realm of cosmology, ontology and metaphysics. Science maintains that tangible knowledge of material reality transcends and so this search cannot be concluded, so there is no use in researching. Thus the nature of science is of a descriptive nature, defining the world qualitatively and quantitatively. Therefore, science is closer to description than interpretation, as interpretation entails matters beyond description. Interpretation (tafseer) is the study of causes of existence of phenomena and its objective. Description by science does not provide man with the explanation of his reality. This is because science disregards explaining the objective. It only analyzes the world in both qualitative and quantitative senses. It only helps humankind to understand the world in terms of its description. However, it does not provide humankind principles for conduct or concepts regarding purpose. Regardless of its expanse, the knowledge provided by science is only a partial knowledge, related to a part of man’s existence and his world. Science does not encompass all the phenomena of his life and the aspects of his existence. Allah (swt) says,

"他们只知道今世的表象，而对于后世，他们是疏忽的。"[TMQ 古兰经 30:7]　科学无法回答许多问题，其中最重要的是关于"为什么"的问题：人为什么存在？宇宙为什么存在？生命为什么存在？这些都是与人及其生命息息相关的关键问题。人若不能找到这些问题的答案，便既无法安心，也无法做出决定，无论这些答案是正确还是错误的。

“They know what is apparent of the worldly life, but they, of the Hereafter, are unaware.” [TMQ Surah Ar-Rum 30:7], There are many questions which science is unable to answer. The most important of them are regarding why? Why do humans exist? Why does the Universe exist? Why does life exist? These are all crucial questions related to man and his life. Man can neither rest nor make decisions, unless he finds the answers for them, whether the answers are valid or invalid.

在这方面,法国政治家、作家安德烈·马尔罗(逝于1976年)创作了小说《人的命运》(法语原名La Condition humaine,意为“人的境况”),书中戏剧化地展现了在其中寻找永恒意义或人性之不可能,并有这样一句话:“即使与死亡也能交流……这最为困难,但或许这正是生命的意义……”除此之外,西方人所说的科学方法的特征是渐进性与增殖性。这意味着一切科学知识都处于发展、演进、调整和变化之中。然而,这也意味着科学并不提供终极的知识。因此,人不可能以此为基础来构建自己的生活和体系。所以,说科学是确立生命意义、解释人类存在之实质的知识,是错误的。

In this respect, the French politician and writer Andre Malraux (died 1976) wrote the novel Man's Fate (French: La Condition humaine, The Human Condition'), which dramatizes the impossibility of finding permanent meaning or humanity, including the remark, “One can communicate even with death .... It’s most difficult, but perhaps that is the meaning of life ..." In addition to this, the traits of scientific method, as Westerners say, are progressivism and proliferation. The implication of this is that all the scientific knowledge is subject to development, evolution, adjustment and change. However, this also means that science does not provide ultimate knowledge. Thus it is not possible for a man to build his life and his systems upon this basis. It is thus wrong to say that science is a knowledge that establishes the meaning of life, explaining the reality of human existence.

关于第二个方面，即以科学方法作为思维的基础，其方法论是有缺陷的。其缺陷体现在几个方面，其中包括：

As for second the aspect, considering scientific method as a basis of thinking, its methodology is corrupted. Its corruption is from several aspects, some of which are:

First: 科学方法是获取知识的特定方法，即对所研究对象进行研究，从而获得关于该对象的真实知识。它基于特定的步骤：观察、归纳（提出假设）、演绎（设计实验）、检验（收集数据）和评估（分析数据并形成理论）。这些就是经典科学方法的步骤。西方思想家之间对于观察先于假设，还是假设先于观察，存在争论。因此，西方人区分归纳法与演绎法：归纳法是综合一系列观察，从而得出一般性原理；演绎法则是从一个或多个陈述（前提）出发，推理得出逻辑结论的过程。尽管如此，科学方法决定了许多自然科学的研究方式，例如物理学、化学和生物学，也决定了社会科学的研究方式，包括社会学、管理科学、政治学、心理学和历史学。

First: Scientific method in arriving at knowledge is the specific method of research, achieving true knowledge of a subject that is researched. It is based on specific steps: Observation, Induction (formulation of hypotheses), Deduction (experiment formulation), Testing (data collection) and Evaluation (data analysis and theory formulation). These are the steps of the classical scientific method. There are debates amongst the Western thinkers about the precedence of observation over hypothesis and vice versa. So the Westerners distinguish the inductive method, body of observations is synthesized to come up with a general principle, from the deductive method, the process of reasoning from one or more statements (premises) to reach a logical conclusion. Nonetheless the scientific method determines much of natural science, such as physics, chemistry and biology, as well as social science, including sociology, management science, political science, psychology and history.

科学方法这种方法不适合作为人类思维的基础。这是因为，要为人类奠定思维的基础，就必须让全人类都能够接触和掌握，使他们都能以此构建自己的思考。然而，科学方法实际上是一种复杂的方法，受制于特定的法则和条件，并非所有人都能遵循或满足。现实地说，科学思维可以作为特定人群和派别的思维基础，但不能作为普通大众的基础。如果知识或真理是所有人的权利，那么思维就必须建立在人人都能接触、人人都能在其上构建的普遍基础之上。而科学方法并非如此。科学方法在西方的出现及其在社会中的突出地位，都基于一种反对教会知识的革命性批判思潮。之所以拒斥，是因为教会和神职人员剥夺了个人讨论和批判的自由，剥夺了人依据自身意愿决定接受或拒绝的权利。

The method called the scientific method is not fit to be a basis of thinking for man. This is because laying a basis of thinking for humankind necessitates that it must be accessible to all of humanity, so that they can all build a foundation for their thinking. However, the scientific method is in fact a complicated method that is subject to specific laws and conditions, which not all humans can either adhere to or fulfill. Realistically, scientific thinking can be a basis of thinking for particular people and factions, but not for the general masses. If knowledge or reality is the right of all the people, thinking must be made accessible upon a general basis, for everyone to build upon. This is not the case in the scientific method. The emergence of the scientific method in the West and its societal prominence were both based on a revolutionary critical trend that rejected ecclesiastical knowledge. The rejection was because the Church and clergy confiscated individual freedom for discussion and criticism, depriving the right to accept or reject by volition.

此外,西方以科学作为思维的基础,使科学取代了教会,成为必须敬从和遵循的至高权威。科学提供的关于宇宙和生命的种种解释,即便并非人人都能提出或理解,也变成了所有人都必须服从的东西。而这些解释其实仅仅是假说,尚未达到确定知识的层次。即便科学知识得到证明,也不能被视为终极知识,因为它总是要接受修正、改进和演进。西方的思维就这样从服从教会,转向了对科学的盲目服从和追随。更有甚者,有人把科学当作一种宗教,例如山达基(Scientology)邪教便是一例。科学并不掌握有关人类存在问题的终极答案。因此,本该将西方人从束缚中解放出来的科学,自身反而成了枷锁。

Moreover, by making science as a basis of thinking in the West, it displaced the Church as a sublime authority that must be heeded and complied. What was provided by science as explanations for the universe and life, even though they are not accessible for all to formulate and comprehend, became obliged upon everyone to submit to. This is even though they are mere hypotheses that have not reached the level of certain knowledge. Even when scientific knowledge is proved, it cannot be considered as ultimate knowledge, for it is always subject to correction, amendment and evolution. This was how the Western thinking turned from submission to the Church to the blind submission and following of science. Moreover, some of them consider science as a religion, with the example of the Scientology cult. Science does not possess the ultimate answer related to the issue of human existence. So, science, which was intended to emancipate man in the West, itself became a shackle.

其次：科学方法建立在实验的基础之上。只有可以被感官直接感知的物质才能被研究。它在思维领域或与思考相关的研究中没有位置。至于西方将科学方法推广到所有知识和人类研究的各个领域，那是模仿和效法思维本身的基本方法。也有一些西方人承认，经验方法不能适用于人类的全部知识。他们指出，人类的情感和感觉无法从经验数据的角度加以研究，因为它们不是可以接受科学实验检验的有形物质。塑造社会的人际关系，以及其中的各种具体差异，同样无法依据基于实验室测试的经验方法来研究。

Second: The scientific method is based on the basis of experimentation. It is only possible to research materials that are tangibly sensorial. It has no place within the realm of thoughts or research related to thinking. As for what the West sees of generalizing the scientific method to all the knowledge and all fields of human research, it is by emulation and imitation of the fundamental method of thinking itself. There are Westerners who concede that the empirical method cannot be applied to all human knowledge. They cite that human emotions and sensations cannot be studied from the empirical data perspective. This is because they are not tangible materials that can be subjected to scientific experimentation. Human relationships that shape the society, with specific variations, also cannot be studied according to empirical methods, based on laboratory testing.

第三：科学方法并不能得出确定的结论。相反，它是不确定的，且容易出错。这是科学研究中所观察和公认的事实。因此，科学知识被描述为概率性的、不断发展的知识。科学思维会经历演进、发展和变化，所以科学思维并不确定。因此，科学方法不适合作为人类思维的基础，人无法以之建立其存在并将其作为生活的根基。这是因为它既不提供稳定的事实，也不能给出关于事物存在、其特性及本质的终极结论，甚至不能提供一种根本的思维方法。如果把科学方法当作思维的基础，就会导致人类存在概念的淡化，使生命失去意义。这将造成人们在理解存在本质上的模糊，以及在自我认知、人生目标和人生角色认识上的混乱。这会动摇人的根基，使人沦为一个荒诞的存在。总之，尽管科学方法有其优点，也为人类所需要，但它不适合作为思维的基础。这一点即便在它适用于经验科学以及某些可以进行实验室检验的知识领域时，依然成立。

Thirdly: The scientific method is not of definitive results. Instead, it is indefinite and subject to error. This is the matter observed and agreed upon in scientific research. Therefore, scientific knowledge is described as probabilistic and developing knowledge. Scientific thinking is subjected to evolution, development and change. Thus scientific thinking is not certain. Accordingly, the scientific method is not fit as a basis for human thinking, which man can establish his existence upon and adopt as the basis of his life. This is because it neither provides stable facts nor does it give ultimate results about the existence of things, their characteristics and their essences. It doesn't even provide a fundamental method of thinking. If the scientific method is taken as the basis of thinking, it will lead to the dilution of the concept of human existence, losing the meaning of life. This will result in obscurity in comprehending the essence of existence and confusion within man’s awareness of himself, his objective and his role in life. This is the matter that would shake man, making him a mere absurd being. In short, though the scientific method has its advantages and is needed by man, it is not fit to be a basis of thinking. This is even whilst it is appropriate for empirical sciences and some of the fields of knowledge that can be subjected to laboratory testing.

正确的思维方法,应当作为思考的基础,并作为判断事物与事务的裁决标准,它就是理性的思维方法。若正确运用理性的方法,即通过感官将感觉到的现实传递至大脑,并与既有信息相结合(此处的既有信息既非先前的观点,也非之后的观点),便能对现实作出解读,并得出正确的结果。感觉与思维不可分割,这与某些西方思想家的主张相反。既有信息并非某些西方思想家所说的先前已持有的观点。既有信息是思维所必需的必要因素。理性的方法,无论其定义是否正确,都是人作为人进行思考时所依据的方法。

The correct method that must be taken as a basis of thinking, making it an arbitrator to judge on things and matters, is the rational method of thinking. If the rational method is utilized correctly by transmitting the sensed reality through sensations to the brain with the presence of previous information (which is neither previous nor subsequent opinion), this will interpret the reality, as it gives the correct results. Sensation is inseparable from thinking, contrary to what some Western thinkers assert. Previous information is not the previously held opinions, as asserted by some Western thinkers. Previous information is the necessary element required for thinking. The rational method, whether it is defined correctly or not, is the method upon which man acts to think as a human,

以理性对事物作出判断,理解事物的存在、实质与特性。这是一种人人都能接受的思维方法,无论受教育程度高低,人类在理解、认识和作出判断时都会自然采用这种方法。理性方法适用于所有知识分支和研究领域,因此既适用于自然科学,也适用于社会科学。此外,它具有两个不同于科学方法的显著特征。 第一,理性方法的特点在于能够产生新的观念。科学方法则以发现和推论为特征,与之不同。这是因为科学方法揭示的是已经存在的事物,而不提供不存在的东西。它建立在既有事物之上,不会产生不存在的东西。因此,科学方法不会产生新的观念。 第二,理性方法的另一个特征是能够就事物的存在提供确定性的结论。它为人提供决定性和确定的事实,使人理解自身生命的意义。科学方法则具有或然性,它只能给人提供各种推测,而推测存在出错的可能。

judging upon things, comprehending their existence, reality and characteristics. It is the method of thinking that is accessible to all people, which humans, regardless of their educational level, automatically adopt in their understandings, comprehensions and in passing their udgments. The rational method is suitable for all the branches of knowledge and research fields. Thus it is suitable for natural science as well as social science. Moreover, it has two distinguishing features that are not found in the scientific method. The rational method is distinguished by its ability to generate new ideas, unlike the scientific method, which is characterized by the capacity of discovery and conclusion. This is because the scientific method reveals the existing and it does not offer the non-existent. It is built upon the existing and does not generate the non-existent. Thus the scientific method does not generate new ideas. As for the second distinguishing feature of the rational method, it is the ability of providing definitive results about the existence of things. It provides man with decisive and definitive facts to comprehend the meaning of his life, unlike the scientific method which has a probabilistic nature. The scientific method does not provide man anything but speculations, having the possibility of error.

可能有人会问：既然此前已经确立，理性（'aql）是无能的、有缺陷的、有局限的，因而无法界定什么是善（khair）、什么是恶（sharr），什么是美好（hassan）、什么是丑陋（qabeeh），那么怎么能把理性的思维方法作为根本思维呢？又怎么能把理性思维作为人的根本思维，而随后又说，在理性之外还有一种力量为人确定什么给他带来益处、什么阻止他遭受损害呢？ 答案是：理性思维本身恰恰是确认这样一种力量的基础，这种力量为人确定什么是善、什么是恶，什么是美好、什么是丑陋。由此，理性确认宇宙、人类和生命背后有一位造物主，是祂创造了这一切，祂就是真主（swt）。理性也确认，人是一种无力为自己与造物主的关系建立一套体系的受造物。因此，必定有一位使者来传达造物主的讯息，确立调整造物主与受造物之间关系的体系。理性还确认，受造物无法独自建立一套没有矛盾、没有参差、没有差异的完整体系，使人能够依此以最完善的安排满足其本能和身体的需要。因此，从这个角度看，也必定存在一套由使者传达的、没有缺陷和矛盾、并且为造物主所喜悦的体系。 所以，把理性方法作为根本思维，与对真主（swt）的确信（Imaan）并不矛盾。真主是那位安排人类生活事务、为人界定善恶美丑的主宰。

It may be asked: how can the rational method of thinking be made the fundamental thinking, as it has been established previously that the mind (‘aql) is incapable, deficient and limited and so it cannot define what is good (khair) or bad (sharr), and what is pleasant (hassan) or ugly (qabeeh)? Or how can rational thinking be the fundamental thinking for humans, when it is said after that there is a Power other than the mind that determines for man what brings him benefit and what prevents harm? The answer is: Rational thinking is itself the basis to affirm such a Power that determines for a man what is good or bad, what is pleasant or ugly. Thus, the mind confirms that there is a Creator behind the universe, man and life who created them all, and He is Allah (swt). The mind also confirms that man is a creation who is incapable of generating a system to organize his relationship with his Creator. Accordingly, there must be a Messenger who conveys the Message of the Creator, placing the system to organize the relationships between the Creator and the created. The mind also confirms the inability of a creature to generate a complete system without contradiction or disparity or difference, upon whose basis man would satiate his instincts and organic needs, with the finest of arrangements. Accordingly, from this perspective, there must also be a system devoid of imperfection and contradiction conveyed by the Messenger, which the Creator is pleased with. Thus there is no contradiction between making the rational method the fundamental thinking and Imaan (confirmed belief) in the Power Who is Allah (swt), Who organizes the life affairs of humans, defining for them what is good, bad, pleasant and ugly.