Talk:List of pre-modern Iranian scientists and scholars

untitled

I believe this should become a part of List of Iranians. roozbeh 12:33, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

1. Considering that I have at least 60 other names to add to the list of Iranian scientists and technologists, I dont think combining lists is a good idea. The list of scientists will become too long to fit into another page.
2. We would have to do this sooner or later anyway, since there is a 32k limit on all wikipedia page lengths.
3. The Iranian list all by itself has room for much expansion; for example the sports list is very incomplete, and there are 200-300 classical poets and writers before 20th century that are not listed, but should be.
4. When we lump everyone into one list, it will be hard to categorize them properly on wikipedia.
5. Others are doing it too. Example: List_of_Scottish_scientists--Zereshk 20:57, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

So far added 122 to the list that was already there. Will add another 100 or so distinguished Iranian scientists soon again. I hope we dont run out of space here. Otherwise we'll have to further separate the list.--Zereshk 00:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Philosophers aren't usually considered scientists, especially mystic philosophers. Art LaPella 06:01, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Today, perhaps. But not in those days. Even Avicenna was a philosopher and had many ideas and arguments in philosophical debates. In those days, the scientist and philosophers were essentially the same thing. Perhaps we should mention this at the top of the page for clarification. --Zereshk 22:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Then maybe a better translation of what you mean into modern language would be "wise men", not "scientists". I'm American, but it sounds normal to call Confucius or Plato a wise man, and it sounds weird to call them scientists. Descartes, or Pythagoras, was both a scientist and a philosopher, but that doesn't make philosophy a science, as that word is used by readers of English Wikipedia. Art LaPella 00:07, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

A concise short list of Iranian geology workers with scientific qualifications? Logo. Why not?

Nevertheless, someone who is both a scientist and a philosopher by today's definitions, can still be listed on a "list of scientists". Cant they? But personally, "Scholars" perhaps would be a better suiting word I presume. No?--Zereshk 03:39, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Descartes or Avicenna can be called a scientist, and philosophers can be called scholars. I only objected to calling philosophers scientists, unless they also did something scientific. Art LaPella 04:03, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah. I think "scholars" would be a more inclusive word.--Zereshk 01:30, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

And I wish I had thought of it. Since you also have a page called contemporary Iranian scientists and engineers, do you think this page should be renamed "List of non-contemporary Iranian scholars"? I've done Wikipedia name changes before if that's a problem.Art LaPella 02:45, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

"List of non-contemporary Iranian scholars"? eeee. Sounds kinda awkward. Can you think of anything better perhaps?--Zereshk 03:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Mistakes

I couldn't help but notice so many mistakes concerning the profession of Physics. A person who studies, teaches or researches the science of physics is referred to as a Physicist and NOT a Physician as this article refers to. Please consider changing Physcian to Physicist. A physician (Physio) is a person who practices Physiotheraphy not Physics.

Thanks.

It would be best if you pointed out which ones are you exacyly refering to.

One must be careful. Some of these guys were both physicians and physicists. Polymaths were common in the classical era.

But alot of them were in fact only physicians.--Zereshk 03:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Disclaimer

Since in the Iranian list, there are scientists and scholars who's ethnicity (as most iranian editor claim) is not clear, e.g. Geber, Alhazen, Al-Farabi,etc, the following disclamier will be added as in List of Arab scientists and scholars.

...In some cases, their exact ancestry is unclear. They may have emigrated or immigrated, and thus may appear in other "Lists of...", but nevertheless their names and work are somehow linked to the words "Iranian".

Jidan 11:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough.--Zereshk 21:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Look Zereshk. You can add all arab scienstist in your list, I really don't mind. Infact, It will be an honour for every arab to be included in an Iranian list. Most of the Iranian editors dont share my opinion. They wont allow me to add scholars like Al-Khwarizmi or Al-Karkhi, which thier ethnicity is not certain. Jidan 22:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I cant convince everyone of everything. Im not their leader.--Zereshk 01:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Of course you are thier leader ;-). No Iranian editor has ever contributed more to wikipedia than you. Jidan 04:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

You shouldn't mistake those who wrote in arabic to spread their knowledge with arabs. In todays world also all scientists write in english to spread their knowledge even if they are not from a enlish spoken country.

List of Iranians...??

The disclaimer at the top says:

By "Iranian", all the peoples of historic Persia are meant, i.e. what is today Iran, Afghanistan, and all the countries of Central Asia ("common modern definition") that were historically part of the Persian empire .

This is a ridiculus statement. Iranians are simply all people that come from Iran. Many great names like Al-Farabi (from Turkestan or Afghinistan), Al-Biruni (from Uzbikastan), or Avicenna(from Uzbikastan) are not from Iran, so why are they (among others) listed in the list of Iranians ??? Jidan 00:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You are mistaking what the west called Persia with Iran. Iran (i.e Greater Iran)is all of those territories that you mentioned. Iran has relatively recently broken up (within the past 300 years) and what Iran is today is what is left of what Iran was. That does not mean these people were not Iranians. They certainly were not from Uzbekistan or Afghanistan, etc... because all of these nations are relatively new, especially in the case of Uzbekistan, which is a very new nation. Claiming these people as Afghani or Uzbek because they lived in an area which eventually became "Uzbekistan" or "Afghanistan" is like calling the Aztecs Mexican because they lived in what later became Mexico. These people hailed from Iranian areas, and many of them were Iranian linguistically, culturally, etc...Azerbaijani 04:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Iranian here means ethnic Iranians . Just like all Arabs are not from Arabia. Avicenna was from Balkh which is still Persian speaking. Biruni was Khwarazmian (Persian). About Farabi sources exist that he is Persian and some sources he is Turkish. Afghanistan(19th century) and Uzbekistan(20th century) were created much later. --alidoostzadeh 05:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

patent7@aol.com

Interducing an Iranian inventor, who holds Patent Numbers: 5,370,430 7,180,203 and patent pending number,20090195362 from USPTO.

For more information please contact at e-mail: patent7@aol.com

Mehdi G. Mozafari —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.29.68 (talk) 18:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

;[

Arabs want to steal the Persian Gulf. Arabs/Turks/Indians want to steal Iranian heritage figures, and when you provide academic sources affirming their Persian identity like Oxford, Britanica, Encycl. Islam, they complain everything is Persianated. Why live in the shadows of Persians. Get your own historical/scientifical/philosophical/poetical figures! I'm running into a lot of governmental sites and cultural heritage sites that make these false claims. Very displeasing indeed. Thanks for all your hard work, and for at least putting up a good fight, even if it's merely on wikipedia. Merci! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ditc (talk • contribs) 18:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Almost every ethnicity has it's famous and world-renowned people, although some do have more than others. LouisAragon (talk) 20:05, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

persian scientist ?????

I think there are no persian and world scientist before Islam, Arab muslim were spread through the world teach many things, there are many Arab descent in persian scientists list....they should not be in persian list. now there are no persians, Iran is not a persians, Iran is a mixture many nations mostly Arabs.

there's no need list of Arab or persian scientists...there should be a muslim scientists list, cause Islamic civilization did generate those scientists. Allah knows best — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shatree (talk • contribs) 08:55, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

We already have a list of Muslim scientist, but we also have a list of Persian scientist. Do you understand why? It's because Persians (alongside with many other muslim ethnicities, like Andalusian/Moorish Spaniards) contributed ALOT during the Middle Ages. Together the two contributed more to islamic science in the Middle Ages than ethnic Arab scientists, that for sure. So it is just fine as it is now. Regards. LouisAragon (talk) 20:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

What "Islamic Scientists" the term is as meaningless as dangerous. Do we call all the different European or American Scholars " Christian Scientists "? The only reason that Iranians published their work in Arabic was to avoid the occupying Arabs burning the books that were not written in a language they did not understand. It was for the same reason that once Thisphone, the seat of power of the Sassanid Dynasty fell to the Arabs and they set about burning the books that were written in Greek and Persian, the Persian translators had to hurridly translate the works of ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Chinese and Persians into Arabic an act that kept the civilization from going back to the stone age. I am a British moslem myself but I doubt very much if any of our 3 branches of Semite religions have anything to do with the expansion of science. It was only a few years ago that Pope John Paul the 2nd apologized to Galileo, after nearly 350 years, because of the behavior of the catholic church towards him and science. Where are these Islamic scientists now?

A.G — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.108.182 (talk) 01:19, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Jabir ibn Hayyan and al-Jildaki

Dear 103.115.184.249,

You're probably right that it's better to include Jabir ibn Hayyan here, even though it's not certain that he was Iranian. I propose to phrase this in the following way:

• Jabir ibn Hayyan (died c. 806–816), alchemist and polymath, one of the fathers of chemistry; may also have been Arab

As for al-Jildaki, since it has now been shown that he was Egyptian (references on his page), should we not leave him out here?

Please let us know what you think, Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 20:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

i agree for al-jildaki, but why do you want to write that hayyan was perhaps arab here but not that he was perhaps iranian in the article about arab scholars ? that's not fair editing, you revert every ip edit you find and try to push your pov about hayyan's ethnicity.

Before today, I did not know of the existence of the List of pre-modern Arab scientists and scholars article. You're absolutely right that we should do the same thing at both pages, so at first I tried to remove Jabir from that page too. Seeing that you don't agree with this, I reconsidered, and decided that it may be best to include Jabir after all. I'm sorry if I was unclear, but I of course also mean to change the article with the list of Arab scientists in a similar way:

• Jabir ibn Hayyan (died c. 806–816), alchemist and polymath, one of the fathers of chemistry; may also have been Persian

What do you think? Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 23:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)