Our era is an age of major challenges and problems, but it is also an age of vast opportunities and immense possibilities. The dilemma people continue to face lies in perceiving problems in their true proportions, and in seeking methodologies, opportunities, and available means to solve them. Here emerges the value of what science provides on both sides of the problem: understanding reality accurately does not occur directly, but rather through a cognitive medium composed of the principles we believe in, our perspective on matters, alongside the data, indicators, and information we have acquired about the reality we seek to know.

What intelligence and mental superiority contribute to understanding and addressing reality is minimal compared to what accumulated experience and practice provide.

It is evident that societies where experimentation prevails, and where science is directed toward addressing the problems people suffer from, have been able to understand their reality far better than those that occupied themselves with interpreting the past, praising themselves, and imagining problems through contemplation and fantasy rather than through surveys and statistics!

The mission of science is not limited to outlining the theoretical space for individual and social initiatives, but extends further to providing us with guidelines on the nature of reactions to the challenges we face. Yet this does not come naturally, but only through complete adherence to the scientific method and through a firm will to resist the falsification that may infiltrate our perceptions and behaviors.

The general feature of reactions is imbalance and lack of discipline. Often, they lose the spirit of initiative and reflection. We frequently respond to extremism with another form of extremism, but in the opposite direction. For example, when there arises an extreme wave of focus on materialism, it is countered by another extreme wave of attachment to spiritual matters, neglecting worldly affairs. Likewise, when societies are struck by poverty and deprivation, and later attain some prosperity, they fail to utilize it wisely, tending instead toward uncontrolled spending without considering how to manage the period following prosperity — and so on.

During the Renaissance, it became a mark of free thinkers to believe in astrology. This, however, had no connection to experimentation or genuine free thinking; it was merely a mistaken reaction to the Church’s condemnation of it—precisely the opposite of what was expected of them!

We must always ask: what value do our ideas and opinions hold if we cannot employ them as tools to search for solutions to the moral and livelihood problems that grind down our people and cause innumerable forms of daily suffering?

There are Islamic countries that suffer from harsh natural conditions such as earthquakes, floods, and hurricanes; others suffer from food and water shortages; still others from illiteracy. Yet, if you examine their educational curricula, you will find that they make no contribution toward raising awareness of the magnitude of these problems or in organizing positive reactions to them!

Advanced countries do something entirely different. Japan, for example, provides a refined model of what a people can do when facing an extremely harsh natural environment. The scarcity of habitable land pushed the Japanese to produce small-sized goods. The fear of isolation led to the development of communication media. The lack of energy resources drove them to search for alternative means of transport. Frequent earthquakes pushed them to create lightweight, portable, low-cost, and easily replaceable items.

Moreover, Japan learned from its long history of violence how to manage transformations effectively. They develop slowly what needs development, since it requires consensus among all concerned authorities. Thus, once conditions are ripe for implementation, the outcome is complete. All of this has been fully supported by general and vocational education.

The United States offers another model of what education can achieve in facing emergencies. When the oil supply crisis hit in 1973 and America faced an oil embargo, authorities quickly turned their focus to energy itself and to teaching it. The objectives of teaching energy included the following:

• Teaching how to manage energy applications at home.
• Teaching how to install solar energy devices.
• Teaching how to increase the efficiency of energy in certain devices and equipment, such as tuning cars and air conditioners.
• Teaching how to consume and manage energy economically in schools, hotels, and factories.
• Teaching how to choose sites for new buildings to maximize use of sunlight.
• Learning energy sciences and technologies.
• Learning how to use energy wisely and consciously.

In addition, speed limits were imposed on cars and planes so that their fuel consumption would be more economical. This represented a set of integrated solutions to face an emergency crisis. Compare this with the way many Islamic societies deal with their energy problems—paying a significant portion of their national income for them—without implementing any of the aforementioned measures. What you see instead is a form of resignation to the problems, rather than educating people on the correct ways to eliminate them or reduce their impact!