I've been going through the previous topics on this subreddit concerning this and this one in particular stood out to me. Was hoping if I could ask more concerning this.
I know that science was highly revered during the "Golden Age of Islam" but was there much vocal opposition by the conservative segments of the Muslim faith? Even though "seeking knowledge" was encouraged, were there any particular Muslim sects/groups that considered it un-Islamic?
Secondly, as far as science is concerned (not philosophy mind you), just how much did Muslim scientists borrow from older civilizations and built upon that knowledge? How many original discoveries can be attributed to just them? Furthermore, I was talking with a friend today who argued that the first modern hospital traces it's origin back from this period and I wasn't sure just how reliable this is even though I googled it a bit. Wanted to gain some clarification on this and any further sources that the kind folks here could recommend on the topic of science and Islam.
Thanks
I think you're having trouble with this question because of terminology. For instance, you write:
...as far as science is concerned (not philosophy mind you)...
Based on this, I get the impression that you're working from a modern definition of science. The problem is, non-modern people couldn't possibly operate under a modern definition of science -- it's not how they understood their world. When, in 17th-century Europe, the work of people like Galileo and Boyle was beginning to define science as we understand it, these thinkers did not consider themselves "scientists." They were "natural philosophers," "letterati," or "scholars."
So science wasn't highly revered during the the Islamic golden age, at least not if we're using "science" in the same sense we do in our non-historical conversations. You encounter the same problem with trying to define the first modern hospital. It's a judgement call, because even the hospitals of the late 19th century don't seem very modern to us.
Great questions all around.
First of all, as far as I know, there were never any splinter groups/sects that considered gaining knowledge un-Islamic. The hadiths (sayings of the Prophet) about gaining knowledge were pretty clear and very widespread, so someone would have a hard time making an argument against learning using Islam.
But you will find modern scientists (not so much historians) making the claim that Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058-1111) was against scientific research and was part of the reason for the decline of the Islamic Golden Age. Neil Degrasse Tyson in particular likes to say that. To be totally honest, however, even a cursory glance at al-Ghazali's autobiography Deliverance From Error shows that not to be the case. He definitely makes some strong arguments against over-reliance on ancient Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates, but he makes clear that while Muslims shouldn't borrow their philosophy from people who had corrupt theological beliefs, there's no religious harm in borrowing scientific/mathematical knowledge from them.
As for how much did they borrow from older civilizations? A whole lot. And they built a whole lot on top of it. One of the biggest factors leading to the Golden Age was the fact that the Muslim caliphate stretched to include Greek, Egyptian, Persian, and Indian lands. So the combined knowledge of those civilizations could be brought together, understood, and used to advance science and math further. There's too many examples of this, but here's one: Muhammad al-Khwarizmi borrowed from the ancient Indians the mathematical concept of zero. The West had previously relied on Roman numerals before this, which made math ridiculously difficult. But not only did he borrow that concept, he also used it to develop algebra, something that had never been systematically organized before in history. Of course algebra would go on to form the basis of higher levels of math developed by later Muslim and Western Europeans.