Related question:
- Critically evaluate Ibn-rushd’s (Averroes) double truth theory.
(YOUR INTRODUCTION)
THE PHILOSOPHER ‘IBN-RUSHD’
Ibn-rushd was born in Spain at about 1126 A.D. His full name is ‘Abu Al walid Muhammad Ibn-rushd’. Also known as ‘Averroes’, he was regarded as the greatest Islamic philosopher of the west during the medieval era. Averroes’s own philosophical position can best be characterized as Aristotle twisted onto a Platonic frame. He inherited Greek thought as a literary corpus and, like his Islamic philosophical predecessors, viewed this corpus as an intellectually integrated totality. Ibn-rushd’s philosophy represents the cumulative development of Muslim thought in the direction and understanding of Aristotle. He died in morocco in 1198 A.D.
THE “DOUBLE TRUTH” PROBLEM
Every exposition of Averroism (the philosophy of Ibn-rushd) must examine the problem, arising in the thirteenth century, of the “double truth.” The masters of Arts, tried to resolve apparent contradictions between faith and truth. While proclaiming logical rigor and precise validity for Aristotelian arguments, they left the final determination of truth itself to the Christian faith. In this historical context it has often been maintained, both in the thirteenth century and in contemporary scholarship, that such thinkers were actually practicing a system of “double truth,” in which a proposition can be true in natural philosophy but contradict a proposition true in theology and conversely. But, as Étienne Gilson and other scholars have convincingly pointed out, no Master of Arts has yet been found explicitly holding such a radical position. Regardless of the apparent persuasiveness of Aristotelian argument, the truth itself was always the dominant ideal of Christian faith.
IBN-RUSHD’S ‘DOUBLE TRUTH THEORY’
Averroes was popular for his double-truth theory, which consists of a formula of two truths, namely;
A. The philosophical truth.
B. The religious truth.
A. Philosophical truths
Philosophical truths are those ideas which are formulated and expressed in a highly technical and scientific manner. E.g. The principle of causality.
B. Religious truths
Religious truths are formulated and expressed as allegories, parables and metaphors. E.g. The parable of the sower in the Holy Bible.
With regard to the language of the scriptures, Averroes maintained that a distinction must be made between the “literal sense” and the “allegorical sense”. This is very much aligned with the problem of religious language as discussed in the philosophy of religion. If a passage is found in the text of the Quran which appears to contradict the paradigms of philosophy, we may suspect that the passage really has a meaning which is deeper than the apparent (literal) interpretation. Hitherto, it is the duty of the philosopher to seek the correct interpretation of the meaning of the respective passage.
As a philosopher, Averroes believed in the truth of philosophy. On the other hand, as a devout Muslim, he also believed that the doctrines and messages of the Quran are divine and true. Hence, he was a double-truth theorist. Ibn-rushd honestly believed that the same truth could be presented in various ways and forms. His real intent was to create a system which enabled him to reconcile doctrines which seemed difficult and distant to the untrained mind.
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION BY AVERROES
As a result of the double-truth concept, Averroes insisted that religious doctrines should be explained to people differently and according to the level of their intellectual capacity. Averroes thus classified people into three groups;
i. The class of the unsophisticated orthodox.
ii. The class of the scholastics and theologians.
iii. The class of the philosophers.
i. The unsophisticated orthodox
An unsophisticated orthodox is a person who is very uncritical in his thinking or who has a very low ability to criticize ideas. This class of people are the largest. It consists of those who whom develop a strong pious faith in religious doctrine because of the sermons they receive. Such categories of people are easily swayed in the mere oratorical effect of speeches.
ii. The scholastics and theologians
A scholastic is a thinker who uses philosophy to articulate religion via dialectical reasoning, the resolving of contradictions and inferential knowledge.
A theologian is an individual whom is concerned with using his rationality to justify the paradigms of faith via apologetics. Hence, this class of people consist of those whose understanding of religion is based partly upon reason but largely on the critical acceptance of certain ideas (faith) from which the reasoning emerges.
iii. The philosophers
A philosopher is a lover of wisdom. He is a professional thinker whom critically analyses any and every bit of information that passes his ears. A philosopher takes nothing for granted and weighs the potency of every idea. This class of people has the smallest size. It consists of those who have been able to acquire a rational understanding of religion. So, their beliefs are based on logical and practical proofs proceeding from premises which have a critical foundation. These are the philosophers on whom religious understanding reaches its highest level of development.
(YOUR
CRITICISMS AND CONCLUSION)
No comments:
Post a Comment