Search results

1

Natural Reason and God’s Infinite Power: Diversity of Approaches in the Late 13th and 14th Century Commentaries on Averroes’s De substantia orbis

100%

Tomanek Ł.

Analiza i Egzystencja. Czasopismo Filozoficzne

|

2021

|

vol. 54

181-215

EN

The subject of this article is Latin reception of Averroes’s treatise De substantia orbis, with special regard to the commentary practice in the late Middle Ages. Numerous philosophical problems were taken up in these commentaries following Averroes’s lead. The most controver-sial among them were these concerning divine attributes, i.e., infinite power, efficient and final causality, and, consequently, God's ability to create out of nothing. Three different commentaries were therefore chosen to exemplify the key differences be-tween the doctrinal approaches of the commentaries on the De substantia orbis. The first two of them-composed by Fernand of Spain and Maino de’ Maineri-represent the Averroistic approach, adopting and developing Averroes’s ideas; the third commentary-composed by an anonymous author in Erfurt around 1362-represents the non-Averroistic approach referring to the questions raised in the De substantia orbis in order to propose orthodox solutions being far from these adopted in the treaty by Averroes himself. The article aims at scrutinizing the problems of infinite power of God and divine causali-ty as they have been taken up by Latin philosophers from the late XIIIth to the second half of the XIVth century by elucidating the key differences between the two lines of inquiry and highligh-ting the variety of approaches to Averroes’s De substantia orbis.

2

Wykorzystanie racjonalnych elementów tradycji arabsko-muzułmańskiej w myśli Muhammada Abida al-Dżabiriego

100%

Wach P.

Przegląd Orientalistyczny

|

2015

|

issue 3-4

207-221

EN

The aim of this article is to present views on the Arab-Islamic tradition (turas) of one of the most famous contemporary Arab thinkers Muhammad Abed al-Jabiri. This Moroccan scholar was an important promoter of democracy in the Arab World. He stood out from the rest of pro-democratic thinkers in his thorough analysis of the Arab-Islamic tradition, a good understanding of which, according to him, plays a great role in the future of the Islamic world. The article discusses his deliberations on the history of Islamic philosophy. By concentrating on this subject, Al-Jabiri wanted to find evidence that rational forces had been present in Islamic legacy for a long time and should be resurrected today in order to shape public opinion towards more sceptical reading of tradition. The result of this would be the desired nahda – Arabic Renaissance and modernity. In this task he recalls the medieval philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes) whom he considers an example to be followed in matters such as the relation between religion and science, the attitude towards non-Muslim concepts and the struggle against harmful mysticism.

3

Argumenty logiczne w średniowiecznej filozofii i teologii muzułmańskiej: Al-Ghazali, Awerroes, Ibn al-Munadżdżim

94%

Kokoć D.

Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki

|

2012

|

vol. 2

EN

Philosophical legacy of ancient Greeks greatly influenced the shaping of Medieval Islamic thought. Especially popular were writings of Aristotle, particularly his logical works. Muslims very quickly noticed that logic is a very practical tool, both in discussions with non-Muslims, as well as polemics within Islam itself. This article focuses on three thinkers:Al-Ghazali, Averroes and Ibn al-Munajjim.Al-Ghazali’s ideas exemplify how logic was used in theological disputes within Islam itself. Averroes , in turn, in one of his major works „The Decisive Treaty”, tries to refute accusation aimed at impiety of philosophers. Ibn Rushd shows that philosophy is not contrary to the principles of faith but just opposite. He states that The Quran encourages to learn and deepen the philosophy, because it is the best way to cognition of the truth and it based on syllogistic deduction. Concluding, the article presents how logic was used in disputes with non-Muslims by referring to Ibn al-Munajjim letter.

4

In Pursuit of True Wisdom: How the Re-Emergence of Classical Wonder Should Replace Descartes’s Neo-Averrostic Sophistry

84%

Nehez J.

Studia Gilsoniana

|

2020

|

vol. 9

|

issue 2

287-315

EN

Modern mathematical physics often claims to make philosophy obsolete. This presentation aims to show that the modern concept of wisdom fundamentally diverges with the thinking of Descartes, that, strictly speaking, at least in his metaphysical first principles, if not in his chief aim, he may be a sophist and no philosopher at all. Descartes denies the classical understanding of philosophy and thereby reduces the human person to an intellect separate from the body. Descartes initiated a popular understanding of sophistry that reverberates to today in our modern institutions of philosophy and science. But St. Thomas Aquinas anticipated this divergence and gave a defense of true wisdom in his writing against Averroes. This presentation concludes with what constitutes real philosophy and science as presented by St. Thomas Aquinas, namely sense wonder that creates a search for the true knowledge of the unity responsible for true causes of true effects. For a true restoration of philosophy and science we will need a reemergence and recovery of this understanding of wisdom.

5

Czy Awerroes był awerroistą?

67%

Kaczmarek P.

Studia Philosophiae Christianae

|

2013

|

vol. 49

|

issue 2

79-94

PL

XIII wiek w Europie obfitował w wiele aktywnych nurtów filozoficznych. Jeden z nich, ruch związany z odkrytym na nowo Arystotelesem, zgromadził wokół siebie grupę ludzi zwanych „awerroistami”. Bardzo szybko tenże nurt zaczęto kojarzyć z Awerroesem, filozofem muzułmańskim z XII wieku. Powyższy artykuł podejmuje analizę filozofii Awerroesa, w celu dowiedzenia, że bezpośrednie łączenie imienia Awerroesa z nurtem awerroizmu stanowi zbyt duże uproszczenie. Artykuł opracowuje ten problem na różnych płaszczyznach. Głównymi źródłami podjętych tu rozważań są dwa dzieła Ibn Ruszda: Fasl al.-makal i Al.-Kaszf an manahidż al.-adilla. Pierwsze zagadnienie dotyczy wolnej woli i pojęcia determinizmu. Poruszany przez awerroistów problem predestynacji, Awerroes umieścił między dwoma skrajnościami: okazjonalizmem i determinizmem. Filozof z Kordoby dowodził, że człowiek nie jest bytem całkowicie zdeterminowanym, ale porusza się według pewnych reguł i korzysta z łaski Bożej, by te reguły wypełnić. W kolejnej części artykułu pada pytanie o problem duszy. Awerroiści twierdzili, że dusza ludzka jest śmiertelna i umiera wraz z ciałem. Uważali, że istnienie jedna wspólna dusza dla całego rodzaju ludzkiego. Ale to nie była teoria Awerroesa. Badając pisma tego filozofa, łatwo dowieść, że wierzył on w istnienie po śmierci indywidualnych dusz ludzkich, w życiu, które nastąpi po zmartwychwstaniu. Ostatnia z omawianych spraw dotyczy zagadnienia tzw. „podwójnej prawdy”. Zwolennicy tej teorii uważali, że istnieją dwie niezależne drogi wiodące ku prawdzie: teologiczna i filozoficzna. Według awerroistów były to drogi niezależne od siebie i każda posiadała swoją własną prawdę. W artykule wykazano jednak, że Awerroesa nie można łączyć ze stanowiskiem ateistycznym, dla którego prawdy teologiczne nie miałyby większej wartości. Był on bowiem wierzącym muzułmaninem, który miał szacunek dla credo swojej religii. Jednakże Ibn Ruszd pokazał trzy drogi rozumowania. Podzielił on ludzi na trzy grupy: filozofów, teologów i prosty lud. Według niego każda z tych grup posługuje się swoimi własnymi metodologicznymi narzędziami. Prosty lud rozumie prawdy swojej wiary w oparciu o metody retoryki, teologowie są dialektykami, natomiast filozofowie posługują się sylogizmem demonstratywnym, który jest najskuteczniejszym sposobem dochodzenia do prawdy. Na pewno badanie filozofii Awerroesa pozostaje stale aktualnym zadaniem. Warto jednak pamiętać o jednej uwadze – a mianowicie, należy zawsze starać się odróżniać oryginalne myśli Awerroesa od jego komentarzy dzieł Arystotelesa, które nie zawsze pokrywają się z poglądami Ibn Ruszda.

EN

We can identify many branches of philosophy in 13th century Europe. The newly rediscovered philosophy of Aristotle, brought together the so–called “averroists”. The title “averroist” became linked with Averroes, a Muslim philhosopher in the 12th century. This article examines the philosophy of Averroes with the aim of showing that the linking of averroist approaches with his name is oversimplistic. The article does this in a few ways. The main sources of this exploration are two works written by Averroes: “The Decisive Treatise” (Fasl al.-maqal) and “Faith and Reason in Islam” (Al.-Kaszf an manahidż al.-adilla). The first issue is in regard to free will and determinism. Averroes placed predestination, as put forward by averroists, between two extremes: occasionalism and determinism. The philosopher from Cordoba argued that the man is not a fully determined being but moves in accordance with certain laws, for which he requires the grace of God to fulfil. The next part of the article looks at the soul. Averroists thought that a human soul is mortal and dies with the body. They believed that there is one common soul for all mankind. However, this is not Averroes’ theory. In examining his writings, it is clearly seen that he believed in the existence of individual souls after death, in a life following the resurrection. The final matter involves the theory of “double–truth”. Advocates of this idea believe that there are two independent ways of discovering the truth: theological and philosophical. Averroists argued that theology and philosophy are independent of one another and that each has its own truth. In our article we demonstrate that Averroes is not an atheist, for whom theological truth has no real value. On the contrary, he was a faithful Muslim, who respected the creed of his religion. However, Averroes (aka Ibn Rushd) showed three ways of reasoning. He divided people into three groups: philosophers, theologians and the common people. According to him, each group uses its own methodological tools. The common people understand the truth of their faith based on the methods of rhetoric, theologians are dialecticians, and philosophers use the syllogic demonstration, which is the most effective way of arriving at the truth. Certainly the study of Averroes’ philosophy remains a constant task. One needs to bear in mind however, that one should always try to distinguish his original thoughts from his comments on the works of Aristotle, which do not always correspond to his own views.

6

Peter Redpath’s Philosophy of History

51%

Hancock C. L.

Studia Gilsoniana

|

2016

|

vol. 5

|

issue 1

55-93

EN

Peter Redpath is a distinguished historian of philosophy. He believes that the best way to acquire a philosophical education is through the study of philosophy’s history. Because he is convinced that ideas have consequences, he holds that the history of philosophy illuminates important events in history. Philosophy is a necessary condition for sound education, which, in turn, is a necessary condition for cultural and political leadership. Hence, the way educators and leaders shape culture reflects the effects of philosophy on culture. In light of this background, it is possible to discern in Redpath’s account of the history of philosophy a corresponding philosophy of history. This emerges as he explains how philosophers have produced changes in thinking that have profound consequences for the culture at large. Some of these changes, many of them significant, have been positive, but others have been disastrous. Much of Redpath’s philosophy of history diagnoses what went wrong in the history of philosophy so as to indicate why modern culture suffers considerable disorder. The good news is that Redpath’s philosophy of history prescribes ways to correct Western Civilization’s current malaise.

Refine search results

2 Studia Gilsoniana

1 Analiza i Egzystencja. Czasopismo Filozoficzne

1 Przegląd Orientalistyczny

1 Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki

1 Studia Philosophiae Christianae

1 Hancock C. L.

1 Kaczmarek P.

1 Kokoć D.

1 Nehez J.

1 Tomanek Ł.

1 Wach P.

1 2021

1 2020

1 2016

1 2015