This piece is a response to a discussion I had on the Facebook page Analytic Philosophy.
Sufian Moin presents Asadullah Ali al-Andalusi's argument in the following way:
“mind is capable of imagining and conceiving of possibilities that the external world does not offer through direct experience”
that means virtually nothing until I know what it is he's imagining and why he takes it to be an imagination of something real/actual and not simply an imaginative act.
Take D.M. Armstrong's paper 'The Nature of Possibility' (1986). He sums of what happens with a single word: 'combinatorialism'.
What does it mean to “think of infinity”? What are you thinking of? Are you thinking about George Cantor's statements, a set of equations, a visual image of vast space, etc.?
Perhaps; though none of these things, strictly speaking, capture infinity; let along imagine it.
It may be that no one “travels beyond the limits of the external world”.
People may believe that they do so; though believing that you do x doesn't mean that you do x. That is, no one conceives or imagines Allah beyond time and space. That which they do imagine will be proxies for Allah and a place beyond time and space. And those proxies may well be derived from their experiences of the natural world.
“people believe that there is a meaningful transcendental reality (Allah) that shares no properties with the natural world”.
That could be an acceptance of naturalism up to Allah and the transcendent realm. Thus the argument isn't itself an alternative theory of naturalism.
“It is the belief that 'science is the only way to know anything' or in the very least that 'science is the most reliable form of knowledge about anything'.”