Here is a great series of academic lectures, produced by LMU and KCL, covering the history of Islamic philosophy:
Posted by Al-Asiri on August 2, 2013 in History
August 2, 2013 at 7:54 pm
These are excellent; jazakum Allahu khayra!
March 10, 2015 at 12:12 pm
I haven’t looked at these yet so this comment speaks more to the general state of affairs, but just from the title and the list of people they chose to mention they seem ignorant of some major points. For instance Most classical Islamic scholars where opposed to philosophy, many passing fiqh rulings against it, yet here we see them incorrectly labelling the very works of the scholars who opposed philosophy as philosophy. Case in point Imam al Ghazali extensively wrote against philosophy and essentialy dealt a death blow to philosophy in Islamic lands with his work the incoherence of the philosophers yet they want to label him as a philosopher.
This is rather an example of the western moronic view of the world, since they dont have any real connection to the people and cultures they are studying they incorrectly label everything that is “theory” to them as a philosophy, the label is used like a blanket statement, when in reality what they called philosophy was science to the people of the time and they themselves made a real and clear distinction between science and philosophy, opposing the later vehemently.
Relatively speaking these people are morons, and they deserve the label because the english language is there “crown and jewel” yet they dot seem to be capable of differentiating between simple definitions, scientific theory and philosophy. Even if there science of the time was wrong by todays standards, you still cant call it philosophy as they ignorantly have.
Another case in point, they labeled Aqeedah, Islamic creed as philosophy, the creed of Islam is directly derived from the Quran and Sunnah not the conjecture of philosophers so by there own standards they have literally labeled religion itself as philosophy.
The source of religion is revelation or wahy, the prophet (saws) spoke from what he saw he wasnt theorising or speculating. Lets assume some fictional prophet was wrong in his claims about prophethood but sincere in speaking his experiences, even then that still doesn’t turn what he said into philosophy because he is repeating what he is seeing and experiencing.
Philosophy comes from speculation and deduction regarding a matter, not one retelling his experience with revelation or inspiration in the case of Wali (saint) which is what Imam al Ghazali did, they are indirectly accusing him of being a liar about the source of his knowledge, inspiration.
Another case in point is the fact they love to relabel the works of scholars as metaphysics to add scepticism when they them self never used the word, they called it simply physics because they where dealing with science not philosophy, all this amounts to unethical behaviour because they are misrepresenting the views of the scholars they are supposedly teaching.
Hence these people are clueless about the subtleties of their subject and will always remain so.
After having briefly listened to his podcast on Imam al Ghazali he makes most of these mistakes, the most significant is his inability to differentiate between various disciplines of knowledge, which is absolutely required because Imam al Ghazali was qualified in many different fields of knowledge and hence had the capacity to speak as an expert in each, a mathematician when he chose, a physicist, Faqih etc, yet these people who cant seem to trace the sentence back to its origin among these sciences call the entire thing philosophy, its laughable how simple science is philosophy to them regardless of how sincere he may be in his works.
I wouldn’t poison my mind with his interpretations of matters though because it may be hard to come back from it, he is just plain confused not realising what the Islamic sciences even are, you may end up with a classic fiqh (legal) example of Imam al Ghazali being labeled philosophy because he is incapable of recognising it.
March 10, 2015 at 12:36 pm
Academic institutions can fix this sad state of affairs by teaching a subject called “How to recognise a scientific argument from Yore”, it’s crucial if you are to study the ancient worlds scientists, most of whom where polymaths.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)