A Response to Stefano Bigliardi’s Assessment of Science in Andreas Tzortzis’s <em>The Divine Reality</em>

This article responds to Stefano Bigliardi’s critique of my book The Divine Reality. I address his concern regarding “scientific miracles” (al-i’jāz al-‘ilmī) and his argument that my book undermines science, clarifying the distinction between critiquing science and critiquing scientism. I elaborate on how science can support theism and counter his assessment of my epistemological position on scientific conclusions by demonstrating consistency with established academic discourse. I also address his claim that I misinterpret David Hume’s work and highlight his failure to engage with my discussion on the tension between rationality and evolutionary theory. Furthermore, I defend my view of instrumentalism in science, particularly in biology, responding to Bigliardi’s concerns about accepting scientific theories as best working models without epistemic commitment. This article concludes that, while Bigliardi’s critique is appreciated, he misrepresents The Divine Reality, misinterprets established views in the philosophy of science, displays a lack of analytical rigor, and inadvertently introduces confusion into the field of Islam and science.