Seyed Hashem Moosavi
Introduction
As 10 November, World Science Day for Peace and Development, approaches, we have an opportunity to reflect on the relationship between knowledge and humanity’s future. This occasion, observed by UNESCO, reminds us of the responsibilities that science carries towards society. Yet a fundamental question remains: what determines whether the growth of knowledge brings greater security and peace, or increases humanity’s capacity for domination and destruction?
This question usually brings advanced weapons and military technologies to mind. Yet the role of knowledge in war and peace extends much further. Psychology can help heal human suffering, or it can be used to manipulate people’s emotions. The teaching of history can encourage mutual understanding or pass the hostilities of the past on to new generations. Education, too, can prepare children for dialogue and cooperation, or teach them to regard humiliation and violence as normal.
Any discussion of peace that overlooks either the natural sciences or the humanities and social sciences will therefore be incomplete. This article argues that human dignity provides a standard for guiding both fields of knowledge, and that moving away from ethics makes it easier to exploit their achievements for violent ends.
Human Dignity as a Standard for Assessing Knowledge
The Holy Qur’an says: «وَلَقَدْ كَرَّمْنَا بَنِي آدَمَ» “We have indeed honoured the children of Adam.” Surah al-Isra’, 17:70.
The expression used here is “the children of Adam”. It offers an important basis for recognising the dignity of human beings beyond their ethnic affiliations or social standing. From this perspective, no person should be treated merely as a means of increasing someone else’s wealth, power or prestige.
When this principle informs scientific activity, clear questions arise. Have the health and freedom of choice of those taking part in research been respected? Does a new technology reduce human suffering? Is an understanding of people’s behaviour being used to help them make informed choices, or to exploit their vulnerabilities?
Human dignity also directs our attention to those who are often overlooked in the calculations of power: a child harmed by war, a patient unable to obtain treatment, or a family suffering discrimination.
Scientific progress contributes to a dignified life when these people, too, are taken into account in decision-making.
Knowledge and Moral Development in Religious Teaching
In the Qur’anic understanding, teaching goes hand in hand with human development. Describing the mission of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, Allah says: «وَيُزَكِّيكُمْ وَيُعَلِّمُكُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ» “He purifies you and teaches you the Book and wisdom.” Surah al-Baqarah, 2:151.
The placing of purification alongside teaching reminds us that acquiring knowledge should go hand in hand with improving our motives and conduct. Society needs expertise, and it also needs people who will use their expertise responsibly.
It is also narrated from Imam Ali, peace be upon him: «الْعِلْمُ مَقْرُونٌ بِالْعَمَلِ … وَالْعِلْمُ يَهْتِفُ بِالْعَمَلِ، فَإِنْ أَجَابَهُ وَإِلَّا ارْتَحَلَ عَنْهُ. » “Knowledge is joined to action … Knowledge calls out for action; if action responds, it remains; otherwise, it departs.” Nahj al-Balaghah, Saying 366.
These words remind us of the responsibility that comes with knowing. Awareness of the effects of humiliation should be reflected in how we raise and educate children. Understanding the harm caused by discrimination should shape our social decisions. Recognising a technology’s destructive power should lead us to use it responsibly.
We should not, of course, read the modern division between the natural sciences and the humanities and social sciences directly into these texts. What we draw from these teachings for the present discussion is the need to bring together understanding, wisdom, moral development and responsible action.
How the Natural Sciences and the Human Sciences Shape One Another
In everyday life, the natural sciences and the humanities and social sciences continually depend on one another. Building a water supply system, for example, requires engineering knowledge. But deciding how water should be distributed, which communities’ rights must be protected and how disputes between users should be resolved also involves economics, law, management and ethics. Social decisions shape technical design, while technical possibilities, in turn, influence social relationships.
This connection is even more apparent in the digital world. Designing a social media platform depends on computer science, but an understanding of attention, emotion and collective behaviour also shapes its development. This same combination of knowledge can strengthen family connections and public education or be used to stir up hatred and exploit users’ anxiety. In turn, the spread of this technology changes educational practices, family relationships and political behaviour.
The humanities and social sciences are therefore more than ethical observers of technology: they help to develop and apply it, and are themselves changed by it. Just as a technical tool can cause harm, a social theory or educational approach can be used to justify discrimination and repression. Both the scholarly quality of knowledge and the ethical direction of its application need to be examined.
Prophet Yusuf and Knowledge in the Service of Human Security
The story of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), peace be upon him, offers a vivid example of practical planning joined with human responsibility. Faced with news of years of abundance followed by famine, he did more than describe the danger. He set out a plan for production, crop storage and the management of consumption: «تَزْرَعُونَ سَبْعَ سِنِينَ دَأَبًا فَمَا حَصَدْتُمْ فَذَرُوهُ فِي سُنْبُلِهِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِمَّا تَأْكُلُونَ» “You will cultivate for seven years continuously. Leave whatever you harvest in its ears, except for the little that you eat.” Surah Yusuf, 12:47; see also 12:48–49.
When he asked to be entrusted with the storehouses, he said: «اجْعَلْنِي عَلَىٰ خَزَائِنِ الْأَرْضِ إِنِّي حَفِيظٌ عَلِيمٌ» “Put me in charge of the storehouses of the land; I am indeed a knowledgeable guardian.” Surah Yusuf, 12:55.
Trustworthiness and knowledge stand side by side in this request. Managing public resources requires both competence and a commitment to safeguarding what belongs to the people.
Drawing on this story, we can say that food security involves more than increasing production. Foresight, the management of consumption and public trust also matter. Knowledge contributes to a community’s peace when it serves to protect people’s lives. Reducing deprivation and insecurity in people’s livelihoods can also limit some sources of tension, although it cannot, by itself, remove every cause of conflict.
Peace Is Nurtured at Home and at School
Social peace depends on habits that people learn in their everyday relationships. A child who is repeatedly silenced through humiliation may come to see silencing others as a way to settle disagreements. By contrast, a child who has opportunities to explain, listen and put mistakes right has a better chance of learning responsible dialogue.
Consider a hypothetical example. Two pupils have become involved in a fight. A teacher could humiliate one of them in front of the class without hearing their accounts. Alternatively, the teacher could first stop the fight, listen to both pupils, identify the unacceptable behaviour and show them how to make amends. In the second approach, wrongdoing is still addressed, while the child’s dignity is protected as their behaviour is corrected.
In such a situation, educational and psychological knowledge helps the teacher choose an approach, while ethics requires respect for dignity and fairness. If a detailed understanding of a child’s behaviour is used to dominate them, even apparently well-planned methods can cause harm.
Disagreements at home or at school are, of course, different from wars between countries. Nevertheless, the ability to listen to others, manage anger and act fairly helps to sustain a more peaceful society. A community that nurtures these abilities will be better equipped to resolve disagreements peacefully.
History and Geography: Mutual Understanding or Renewed Hostility
History shapes collective memory. If we teach the past in a way that presents our own nation as invariably blameless and others as inherently evil, we generate hostility rather than historical understanding. If we hold all the descendants of a people responsible for the actions of a government or army in the past, we condemn today’s generation for something they did not do.
Responsible history teaching requires the examination of evidence, an understanding of context, attention to different accounts and a distinction between the responsibility of individuals and institutions and the collective identity of a people. This approach does not conceal victims’ suffering. It makes it possible to understand injustice more accurately and help prevent its recurrence.
Geography, too, can alert us to the interdependence of societies: shared rivers, air pollution and natural resources have implications that extend beyond a single border. Yet maps and descriptions of territory can also be used to inflame tensions by erasing the presence of others or presenting only selected parts of the picture. A map alone, of course, does not establish sovereignty. Territorial disputes require historical and legal examination, together with attention to the rights of the people concerned.
Here, respect for human dignity means presenting the facts honestly and refusing to turn them into a licence to humiliate people or deny their rights. It does not require changing the truth to please others.
Justice towards an Enemy as a Serious Test of Ethics
Our commitment to ethics becomes more difficult when we face an opponent or an enemy. It is precisely here that the Holy Qur’an says: «وَلَا يَجْرِمَنَّكُمْ شَنَآنُ قَوْمٍ عَلَىٰ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا اعْدِلُوا هُوَ أَقْرَبُ لِلتَّقْوَىٰ» “Do not let hatred of a people lead you to abandon justice. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness.” Surah al-Ma’idah, 5:8.
The application of this standard to scholarly work is clear. Political hostility must not lead researchers to falsify or conceal data. Historians must not deny the good qualities of those they oppose. Specialists must not use labels applied to whole groups to justify indiscriminate harm to human beings.
During the Battle of Siffin, Imam Ali, peace be upon him, heard some of his companions verbally abusing the Syrians. He stopped them and said: «إِنِّي أَكْرَهُ لَكُمْ أَنْ تَكُونُوا سَبَّابِينَ» “I do not wish you to be people who resort to verbal abuse.”
He then advised them to describe the other side’s conduct instead of abusing them, and to pray: «اللَّهُمَّ احْقِنْ دِمَاءَنَا وَدِمَاءَهُمْ، وَأَصْلِحْ ذَاتَ بَيْنِنَا وَبَيْنِهِمْ» “O Allah, spare our blood and theirs, and bring reconciliation between us and them.” Nahj al-Balaghah, Sermon 206.
These words were spoken in the midst of battle. The Imam accepted criticism of the enemy’s conduct but rejected verbal abuse and prayed for the lives of both sides to be spared. For teachers, preachers, journalists and researchers, this account offers a model for opposing injustice with accuracy, reasoned argument and respect for ethical limits.
Justice towards an enemy does not prevent us from defending the oppressed or resisting aggression; it defines the humane limits of that resistance. Lasting peace also requires the restoration of rights and the removal of injustice. Silence imposed on victims does not create a just peace.
Ethics Must Be Part of Scientific Institutions
Individual advice alone is not enough to keep knowledge directed towards human well-being. Alongside specialist skills, universities should develop the ability to assess social and ethical consequences. Research institutions should be accountable for their research aims, the rights of those involved and foreseeable risks. Decisions about technology also require dialogue between specialists from different fields and a willingness to hear those whose lives it affects.
At home and at school, ethical teaching must also be visible in adults’ behaviour. Speaking about dignity becomes educationally meaningful when a child’s questions are heard, their mistakes are considered fairly and adults are willing and able to apologise to them.
Conclusion
Knowledge increases human capability, but the direction of that capability depends on the motives, values and structures that guide it. The natural sciences and the humanities and social sciences share this responsibility. The former can expand the possibilities of life, while the latter can help us understand behaviour and organise our relationships. Both can also be placed at the service of domination and violence.
Human dignity requires us to take people’s lives, dignity and rights seriously in research, education and the application of knowledge. The Qur’anic teaching on justice towards an enemy show that this responsibility does not end when disagreement begins.
The further science, education and management move away from ethics, the greater the scope for turning knowledge into an instrument of deception, discrimination and destruction, and the harder it becomes for humanity to attain peace and security. Ethics alone cannot remove every cause of war, but abandoning it removes one of the most important restraints on the abuse of power.
Celebrating science in the service of peace is an invitation to nurture people who know more and take greater responsibility for what they know: people who remember the dignity of others even when they disagree.
