The construction of life

Reviewing modern, scientific civilization, a commentator has made the very pertinent observation that it is not invested with ideological permanence. This seems quite true when we consider that Copernicus replaced Ptolemy, Newton replaced Copernicus, and Einstein replaced Newton.

The culture of the modern age has come to be called the ‘culture of technology’. But this is a contradiction in terms. Culture, by its very nature, suggests permanence. But science and technology are sadly wanting in this quality. Ergo, any culture based on technology will always have the characteristics of impermanence. It can never meet the eternal requirements of human nature.

Technology is of material service to man. As such, it cannot be the total basis of human culture. It can certainly take us from the age of the plough to the age of the tractor or, from the bullock-cart to the aeroplane. But technology cannot give man a culture or a civilization in the real sense of those words. Technology can serve man but it cannot be expected to provide man with the spiritual mainspring of his life — a religion.

Technology, in short, is the servant of man, whereas culture is his life’s religion. If technology is life’s conveyance, it is culture which determines man’s destination. The changes taking place in things like conveyances do no real harm. But when the very bases of culture begin to be shuffled human life will lose its meaningfulness.

The right way is to make technology life’s servant, while adopting religion as the basis of culture. Now when we find that of all religions, Islam is the only one which has been properly preserved and established it goes without saying that the only basis for the construction of life on a foundation of culture is that of Islam. Islam provides a stable base for the construction of human life in which there is no question of change.