Adey5
Heh. The thing about the Ibn Khaldun quotes is that they're completely decontextualised ( and tendentiously so, as the passage between them would blow the whole idea to bits if it wasn't omitted ) from a very long discussion about the types of supernatural perception that are encountered in the world, and how it is possible for a prophet to "connect" with the angelic world ( the pinnacle of the scala vita ) thereby. Anyone who actually bothers to read the section ( the sixth prefatory note ) in Ibn Khaldun, and has some background in the way that neo-platonised aristotelian categories are used in medieval thought would understand perfectly well that the idea of biological evolution is completely foreign ( and abhorrent ) to Ibn Khaldun; he's simply constructing an elegant and elaborate ladder of creation on the classical Aristotelian model so as to "prove" that it's possible for the "prophetic" human to partake in the angelic realm and be the conduit of revelation. Elsewhere - in his discussion of racial types - we can definitively see that Ibn Khaldun does not have a conception of biological inheritance, and simply doesn't understand the idea of the transmission of heritable characteristics from parent to child.
Ibn Khaldun wasn't a scientist, let alone a biologist or observer of the natural world, in any modern sense of the term - he was a historian, metaphysician, judge and political administrator.
Adey5
Fair enough, and you are absolutely correct, but he was certainly onto something and could see a relationship between living organisms. However you are correct that he makes some biological errors as outlined in bold below with my comments in [brackets]
"This world with all the created things in it has a certain order and solid construction. It shows nexuses between causes and things caused, combinations of some parts of creation with others [crocoduck?], and transformations of some existent things into others [morphing species?], in a pattern that is both remarkable and endless.
One should then take a look at the world of creation [er, woteva]. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word 'connection' with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the newest group.
[animals did not descend from plants, nor plants directly from minerals but they share a common ancestor ' You are correct he sees this change as a ladder not a tree]
The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man. This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.
We explained there that the whole of existence in (all) its simple and composite worlds is arranged in a natural order of ascent and descent, so that everything constitutes an uninterrupted continuum. The essences at the end of each particular stage of the worlds are by nature prepared to be transformed into the essence adjacent to them, either above or below them. This is the case with the simple material elements; it is the case with palms and vines, (which constitute) the last stage of plants, in their relation to snails and shellfish, (which constitute) the (lowest) stage of animals. It is also the case with monkeys, creatures combining in themselves cleverness and perception, in their relation to man, the being who has the ability to think and to reflect. The preparedness (for transformation) that exists on either side, at each stage of the worlds, is meant when (we speak about) their connection.
Plants do not have the same fineness and power that animals have. Therefore, the sages rarely turned to them. Animals are the last and final stage of the three permutations. Minerals turn into plants, and plants into animals, but animals cannot turn into anything finer than themselves."
[it seems he is suggesting that modern species descend from modern other modern species, which is of course not the case as we all know that modern species derive from ancient species that are no more].
All in all it was not a bad effort, and he had probably never even seen a fossil.
But to ANYONE who claims this is science from the Quran or proof that Islam is in any way true must need their head examined.
The poster of the original video is making a fallacious statement that just because someone who is Muslim discovers something, that somehow validates the religion of that person.
Of course we can all see straight through that, but the believers will fall for it hook, line and sinker.
Topic: Evolution & Counter-Creationism Video Resource