Talk:Ibn al-Nafis

message: I corrected a few grammar and spelling errors but could not correct the main body of article as I could not understand it.
--Banana04131 03:13, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Grammer and Spelling

message: Wasn't he accused of heresy and ordered killed for his work on the circulatory system?
:That was Michael Servetus, not Ibn al-Nafis. Jagged 85 (talk) 22:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Manner of death

message: I quote:
"This was a view that was held by a majority of ulema (legal scholars) in his time, but this view was not shared by traditional hadith scholars in his time who did not differentiate between hadiths that were "sahih" and "mutawatir"." 
What historical evidence is there to support this claim? Mutawatir is mentioned in ibn al-Salah's Introduction to the Sciences of Hadith, for example, as well as in al-Kifayah by Khatib al-Baghdadi. Therefore this was not an overlooked concept the traditional scholars nor was the 'distinction' between the two categories a new concept in ibn al-Nafis's time. Supertouch (talk) 21:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Broad Unsubstantiated Generalization

message: What's does an orthodox Sunni Muslim mean? What does orthodox has to do with Islam?--TheEgyptian (talk) 08:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious and philosophical background section 

message: Please explain why this article uses a non-standard scheme of transliterating Arabic.  For example, it uses the Latin letter 'c' to represent the Arabic letter 'ain', more usually represented by a grave accent '`'.  Again, it uses 'ou' for either a short or long 'u'; and also uses 'e', representing what, I am unsure.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.191.51.146 (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We are regularly trying to fix transliteration on articles. I have noticed you have made wonderful contributions to Wikipedia, why don't you become a member and then post on my talk page and I can forward you to the right people to help with transliteration (or whatever else you're interested in).  --Enzuru 18:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transliteration scheme 

message: I am not familiar with the work of Ibn al-Nafis (though I'm quite impressed by what I have read), however it is not true that the right optic nerve communicates only with the left-side of the brain and vis-versa. The right medial visual field is detected by the left eye's lateral/temporal retina and does not cross over to the right, rather it communicates directly with the ipsilateral/left brain. The right temporal visual field is detected by the right eye's medial retina and does cross over to the contralateral/left brain. So if Ibn states that the optic nerve totally crosses over, he is also incorrect. If he states the above understanding, then the article should be changed to reflect an accurate description of the path of the optic nerve.  For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optic_tract http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optic_nerve 74.79.243.131 (talk) 03:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Optic Nerve

message: The section on Theologus Autodidactus claims, without any clarification, that:
"This work is one of the first Arabic novels, the first science fiction novel..."
With regard to the sci-fi claim: surely True History, written in the second century AD, would have more of a claim to this title? At the very least it doesn't seem particularly clear that TA was the first sci-fi-esque novel in history.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.247.58 (talk) 14:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: True History is not a novel, whereas Theologus Autodidactus is a novel. In other words, True History has a claim for the first proto-science fiction, but not the first science fiction novel. As for science fiction in general, one point that brings Theologus Autodidactus closer to science fiction is that it provides scientific explanations for every unnatural event in the book, something that is lacking in earlier proto-science fiction works. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 01:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  First sci-fi novel? 

message: A general proposal: in articles for medieval writers from the arabic cultural area, instead of using pictures with dubious historical and aesthetical credentials writers' names in Arabic calligraphy can be used as visual enhancers, unless historically and aesthetically significant pictures can be found.
Absolutely.These fictional drawings are not suitable for an encyclopedia.S711 (talk) 20:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using names in place of pictures for medieval writers in Arabic.  

message: For background information, please see RFC/U and Cleanup.
With 441 edits, User:Jagged 85 is the main contributor to this article by far (2nd: 11 edits). The issues are a repeat of what had been exemplarily shown here, here, here or here. For this reason I restored contents to the last pre-Jagged85 version, that is 26 April 2007, with some modifications. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub and rework 

message: Here's an excerpt from the translation of Theologus Autodidactus by Meyerhof and Schacht (Oxford Clarendon Press 1968):
Part 1: http://i.imgur.com/JFtXN.png
Part 2: http://i.imgur.com/BF94s.jpg
Part 3: http://i.imgur.com/T9uVk.png
It's a summary translation (thus the word summary) and not word for word, but it's the only thing in English.
Where he uses the cosmology of celestial spheres (in vogue before the 15th century) to describe an apocalypse resulting from a deviation in the norm of the Sun-Earth-Moon "orbit" (or whatever they called it), the subsequent effects on human civilization (even describing the biblical prophecy of the Beast more as a man-animal hybrid product of natural forces) then a resurrection of life (where humans' bodies regrow from a small piece of the vertebrae).
It was basically describing the Islamic eschatology of the apocalypse (similar to the Bible's) via the science of his day. You can find references describing the work as science fiction everywhere once again using that mystical tool that is Google (using it doesn't hurt, I promise).
On the bottom of page 57 is the quote regarding the body, "...the body of man as an infant is different from his body as an old man, and likewise the parts of the body, because both the body and its parts are continuously in dissolution and reconstruction, and unavoidably in constant change." The idea of the body building and breaking down the materials of its own constitution wouldn't exist in Europe until the studies of Santorio Santorio in the 17th century (according to the Wiki page on metabolism), and what he did was:
He described how he weighed himself before and after eating, sleep, working, sex, fasting, drinking, and excreting. He found that most of the food he took in was lost through what he called "insensible perspiration".
Which can hardly be called an acknowledgement of metabolism (at least Ibn al-Nafis specifically described "dissolution" and "reconstruction", corresponding to catabolism and anabolism) but as long as it's a part of the European tradition it counts, and whatever the Arabs said doesn't count, because history is only relevant insofar as it's a part of modern European scientific tradition and there is absolutely no historical value to anything that occurred before that according to standard Wikipedia editing policy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.37.26.43 (talk) 01:25, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, a previous version of the article did already discuss Theologus Autodidactus to some extent, before it was all overzealously deleted by a certain Eurocentric witch-hunting "cleanup" group. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 09:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doomsday in his sci-fi novel 

message: 1) The quote doesn't really describe metabolism. If he did write on metabolism, please provide a proper quote.
2) The idea expressed in the quote is ancient. One finds it, for example, in Marcus Aurelius, 1,000 years previous to Mr. Nafis.
3) Will these priority disputes one day cease to be so prominent on Wikipedia? In the world at large? Will they cease to be racist/ nationalistic/ etcist?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:12C1:44F5:743D:504A:F28A:A858 (talk) 23:40, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metabolism?