A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
You know that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa hides the fact the town founder is a bad person because it'd make the town sad?
That is me trying to hold back that, upon research (reading the Wikipedia page), I found out that Fatima al-Fihriya is probably not a real person :(
I've come to accept that reality is far less important to our daily lives than narratives.
I mean, it's a real depressing understanding of the world, but after you embrace it, you learn to work around it and it can even be a huge asset or tool for getting results and interacting with others.
For me personally, I want to learn the disappointing truth about everything, but for the vast majority of people, they will live their whole lives without ever needing or wanting to learn who actually said or did what in history. It's fine. We can keep building stories to influence people to do better things. There is no cosmic arbiter of truth who is going to judge people for spreading a story that leads to better outcomes.
Its not healthy to bury yourself in a false reality.
Thats some crazy ass shit.
I care more about outcomes nowadays far more than if everyone is on the same page, that's never going to happen.
This is a crazy take. Misinformation is not all of the sudden good when it has a positive outcome.
👆 This is how we get Trump and reactionaries, it's this idiotic take right here.
It's funny because we allow people to believe whatever crazy, insane fairy tales they want about what magic sky wizard is the real magic sky wizard and even if those beliefs do harm, we say "well that's their belief."
I'm saying, if people are going to live in fantasy land, tell better fucking stories because our world is literally burning down on the backs of performative shits sitting on the computer being smug about what their perfect future looks like.
I thought the antirealists were anarchists
Difficult to verify does not mean untrue.
Sometimes legends are important.
I don't agree here. Truth is important. The fact that women haven't been visible in science is important. We need to explain why they weren't visible. Creating historical figures is comforting but if their existence is not reliably documented, we should keep explaining why such figures couldn't emerge, and why their absence is significant.
Yes to shitposts, no to fabrications (this lady looks like one - but I suppose it was in good faith)
What if the truth can't be known as Ibn Abi Zar only wrote on this 500 years later and archaeological evidence is not definitive but the story has inspired countless young women in the Islamic world to pursue higher learning?
If an unverifiable story accomplishes the outcome of improving the visibility of women in science and higher education in general, how should we judge that? Would only 100% verifiable truth still take all precedence?
Finally, we have to ask why did this story (if it really is just a story) capture so many imaginations? What cultural current at the time made this gain popularity? Was there a thirst for women to be seen in this light that he was looking to quench?
The humanities may be considered a soft science but it's just as important as science in my view.
Or, if she did exist but almost nobody heard about her in the 500 years after her death, why would that have happened?
(Not taking a position on her existence, but thinking about Hatshepsut and many women whose accomplishments were ignored, hidden, or credited to men)
Is it possible they did hear and it was not written down?
Or it was written down and someone had reason to destroy the evidence?
You've mentioned patriarchal orthodoxy. Could it be that there were powerful individuals that did not like the idea of a woman being credited with this accomplishment?
I think that both are important and can be used together as a tool. Idealism grounded in materialism. The legend itself is a tool for further discussions and inspiration. There's a lot of power in simple ideas.
OK, I get your point - but I think then that it should be clearer if we're talking about a historical figure or a legend. In this particular case, it's a bit fuzzy unfortunately. Ancient historians and all that.
Science is a conversation, just like the Humanities. :) Being wrong is okay, it's just a chance for further discussions. That's why I encourage a bit of freeform experimenting in this space.
The actually reality is this:
Literally nothing is known about this woman outside of a single narrative written by a supposed 14th century Moroccan historian, Ibn Abi Zar', who we know nothing about either outside of him being a historian. Actually, most academics doubt that he was any sort of scholar to begin with because the source of this information is not reliable.
There's literally ZERO evidence to support that this historian was one or that this woman was even real. In fact there's evidence that supports the notion that this story is fake because the inscriptions inside the mosque use a different script than what is claimed in the story. Most academics are skeptical of her existence and her story is treated as a cultural legend rather than historical fact.
Also within the folktale story, which by the way was written over 600 years after her supposed death, claims that she, along with her sister, inherited the wealth from their wealthy merchant father, and they both decided to use that fortune to build two parallel mosques in the same city.
The thing is that mosques in the early islamic periods were more like community centers than purely religious institutions. So it wasn't uncommon for mosques to have a learning center as a part of the complex. Keep in mind, these learning centers were islamic schools that taught islam. They weren't centers for researching and preserving knowledge like modern universities.
Over time, these mosques were repurposed to the needs of their time. Some were turned into purely religious institutions, some were demolished, some were turned into political seats of power, some remained community centers, and some evolved into purely islamic madrasas. Al Qarawiyyin was one of the latter. So this post is nothing more than blatant misinformation.
Tl;dr: This story is fake, this person isn't real, the historical source is unreliable, and the institution is not an actual university but a mosque that later became an islamic madrasa.
al-Qarawiyyin was started as a mosque-madrasa complex.
Science and spirituality were intricately entwined during this era. As an example, Dharmic concepts of sunya led to the conceptualization of zero and its use in mathematical operations which is foundational to many subsequent scientific advancements and necessary to our communication through this platform.
Part of what sets al-Qarawiyyin apart is that it offered degrees or certificates of scholarly achievement before other institutions.
This is why UNESCO’s World Heritage description of the Fez Medina explicitly calls al‑Qarawiyyin “the oldest university in the world,” and Guinness lists it as the “oldest existing, continually operating higher‑learning institution”.
It was more of a mosque until very recently, so not really.
That depends on the the view point. It is true that it was founded as a mosque, and became a teaching centre later. Since universities are considered a European invention by some, it is argued that it was a madrassa op until the 1960's. However, madrassa is basically Arabic for place of study, which this mosque was since the eleventh century or earlier. It was in any case a place of study before the foundation of the university of Bologna.
This Wikipedia page agrees with this comment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_universities_in_continuous_operation. It lists University of Bologna as the oldest one in continuous operation from 1180–1190.
I mean…. It does and it doesn’t. Yes, al-Qarawiyyin was founded as a mosque. Yes, it became a “university” within the last 100 years. But there was a looong span of time between where it was an institution of higher learning not formally classified as a “university”
Paragraph 4 of the article you linked specifically notes that such institutions with mixed provenance were omitted from the list.
Ancient higher-learning institutions, such as those of … the Islamic world, are not included in this list owing to their cultural, historical, structural and legal differences from the medieval European university… These include the University of al-Qarawiyyin… founded as mosques in 859… These developed associated madrasas… by 1129 for al-Qarawiyyin…
Basically it is the oldest educational institution that is currently a university, as opposed to the institution having operated under the university model for the longest time.
That's where the top boffins of the time invented spaghetti with tomato sauce, too!
Nobody tell him how most of the oldest euro uni's got started
The oldest continuously operating university is in Bologna. The one that the post is about was actually a mosque and did not become a university until less than a century ago.
Al-Qarawiyyin is recognized by UNESCO and Guinness as the world's oldest continually running institution of higher learning.
We can apply a purity test here (ie. what qualifies as a university) but.. why except for pedantry? No matter how you frame it, it doesn't take away from the scale or impact of the institution itself.
It was common for religious institutions to also be places of higher learning during this era.
The Nalanda Mahavihara (Buddhist grand monastery) is regarded as world's oldest residential university. It is in present day India, though not operating today. Scholars such as Xuanzang (known as Mokṣadeva in Sanskrit) travelled from China (in his case Luoyang) to Nalanda for his studies and returned with thousands of sutras which were then translated. It was knowledge transfer through such universities during the Tang dynasty that brought the number system we use today (originally described in the Bakhshali manuscripts and further refined by Aryabhata and Bhramagupta) to China.
A lot of higheducation place were also a religious place. For a lot of time education was't just seen as positive science also education of soul.
It is not on the list of the oldest universities, because, like the University of Egypt, which has also existed since the 10th century, they only received the status of University in the 20th century, that of Morocco in 1963 the one of Egypt 1961, before they were higher islamic schools (madrasa or originally founded as a mosque). Anyway the islamic states are way more advanced in science, medicine and mathematic in this era than the occidental oe, very limited by the catholic church.
Golden Age Islam was surprisingly progressive at the time in terms of religious tolerance. Not necessarily because of idealism (although iirc, the Koran doesn't encourage proselytisation), but because many rulers get income taxing non-Muslims.
She looks very fresh for a millenarian.
Damn millenials. Founding universities and doing other woke shit.
WOW, why does this comment section have so much misogyny and Islamophobia? Are people seriously only looking at the Wikipedia article then stopping once their prejudices are confirmed?
How can you seriously claim that Fatima al-Fihri didn't exist because the Rawd al-Qirtas was written centuries afterwards so it's untrustworthy? And that's according to "some historians" over a millenia later? Like, check the references, one is just a french guy saying in his opinion it's too much of a coincidence that the 2 most famous mosques of Fez were built at the same time by 2 sisters??
《Tout au plus pourrait-on dire que le second, avec son parallélisme si parfait entre les deux sœurs et les deux mosquées, paraît trop beau pour être vrai.》 Le Tourneau, Roger (1949)
There are also people claiming it was just a mosque and not a learning institution...
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/2662/fatima-al-fihri-and-al-qarawiyyin-university/
-Most historians agree that Al-Qarawiyyin was the world’s first-degree granting institution, as well as a leading centre of scientific debate and scholarship that is a university. It set the standard that would become the reference point for institutions of higher learning the world over, drawing visitors, students and lecturers from all over the world.
The university's curriculum included but was not limited to Quranic exegesis (tafsir), Islamic jurisprudence, algebra, astronomy, botany, cartography and geography, grammar, history, literature, logic, mathematics, medicine, philosophy, physics and a host of foreign languages including Greek and Latin. Notably, the mosque complex also thrived as a spiritual centre where Islamic mysticism (Sufism) and gnosis (irfan) thrived.
Al-Qarawiyyin’s famous library, which scholars came from around the world to consult, also suffered neglect resulting in a large portion of the collection being lost.
In 2012, the Al-Qarawiyyin Library was rehabilitated and curated by well-known Moroccan architect Aziza Chaouni who discovered Fatima al-Fihri’s own manuscript collections as well as a copy of her diploma from Al-Qarawiyyin in fiqh and mathematics. Since the completion of renovations, the library has been open to the public and includes “exhibition room for manuscripts, a small museum to showcase the history of the Qarawiyine complex, a laboratory for the treatment of old books, and a cafe.” (azizachaouniprojects.com).
I searched for a while to find a photograph of her diplomas on display, but couldn't find any; if anyone else can find them, share them here! I did find pics of the first medical diploma issued though! Take a wild guess where it was issued from?
The university opened in 859, issued a medical bachelor’s degree in 1207AD to a Moroccan doctor Abdellah Bensaleh El-Koutami, who practiced medicine, pharmacy, and veterinary science.
Like... c'mon. This place is truly deserving of so much respect and honour. This is such a stunningly beautiful site with so much rich historical significance, and it's unbelievable that there are comments diminishing that and lying about "the truth". I'll finish off with words from an article about the library's renovations from 2016:
Although the library was opened to the public in 839AD, a strict policy had been put in place, which restricted access to scholars only. Aziza, much like Fatima, wanted the library to be open to all.
After much battle, unfortunately made harder purely because of the fact that she is a woman, the Fez-born architect fought tirelessly and eventually was successful in her struggle. The re-launch of the library in January will see the library open its doors to everyone.
Following three years of restructuring, the library will open in January to the public for the first time in more than 600 years.
Really what this points out to me is there’s no point in caring when there are squabbles about the oldest [thing all people do]. I guess it helps teach people that the education they received growing up was inherently biased towards their local culture, and that’s OK as long as you recognize it.
Ahhhh yes...the Wikipedia quoting discussion, and let's slip a bit of bigotry here , and nationalisme over here and you have thriving comment section, but again nothing new here