With the passing of the notable ancient Greek greats, a new era in philosophy emerged. The Medieval period fostered an outburst of Islamic culture and thought, with many significant philosophers leading the way. Amongst these was Averroes, who thrived during the early 12th century. His many areas of interest allowed him to be a very learned and experienced individual, enabling him to produce many publications elaborating his thoughts. One of these publications is The Decisive Treatise, in which he discusses the role that philosophy plays in religion and how that impacts society. According to Averroes, in The Decisive Treatise, philosophy is a required part of religion that provides educated individuals with a deeper understanding of sacred texts.
Averroes begins by analyzing the Book of God in order to prove that philosophy, or intellect, is a vital aspect of religion, and that it is necessary for complete comprehension of the Law. “Since it has now been established that the Law has rendered obligatory the study of beings by the intellect…therefore we are under an obligation to carry on our study of beings by intellectual reasoning”(165). He goes on to instruct that intellect should be collected by means of gathering all previous knowledge of its kind since one person cannot discover everything about one particular subject. Of course, not all people will interpret text the same way, and some might even make wrongful interpretations by accident. When this happens, the original texts from which the interpretations come from should not be prohibited because more competent individuals will come along that will be able to infer the proper meanings to pass on to the people.
Opinions are subjective and the idea that some interpre...
... middle of paper ...
...l good. Then, when all scholars are making statements that they think that the Law is a benefit to all, and all the scholars that are written off as unbelievers are exiled, the remaining non-academics will only hear the positive opinions about the higher power. With nothing to refute the teachings of the Laws of God according to the ruling power, other than the excused wrong opinions, all people would be forced to have the same view about eternal law.
Even though Averroes’ assertion that philosophy is an obligation from all who study religion seems to support innovative ideas, closer analysis shows the opposite. Considering all the limits set upon the encouragement of producing personal opinions, the role of philosophy is practically redundant. Opinions are only accepted from scholars, and even then, when they are in line with what is considered to be “right”.
8. Paul Arthur Schilpp, as noted in Steven J. Bartlett's ``Philosophy as Ideology'', Metaphilosophy, Vol. 17, No. 1, Jan. 1986, pp. 1ff. This article is a penetrating critique of the closed-mindedness of philosophers.
Theological objections, treated at length in the current volume, cut to the heart of the
Lucretius’ account of his work invites the more enterprising atheists to become more informed and familiar with the patina of a respected tradition, blurring their ability to decipher between enlightenment and classical rationalism. In order for enlightenment rationalism to achieve its end, it must fundamentally transform not only the nature of philosophy itself, but also what we as humans understand as the good life.
young, and given power to prevent other doctrines from being introduced.” But on the smaller scale, the personal level, people interpret these doctrines in their own way, causing thousands, even millions of differing opinions on the same subject.
The growth of religious ideas is environed with such intrinsic difficulties that it may never receive a perfectly satisfactory exposition. Religion deals so largely with the imaginative and emotional nature, and consequently with such an certain elements of knowledge, the all primitive religions are grotesque to some extent unintelligible. (1877:5)
ABSTRACT: This essay explores my own situation of teaching philosophy in a more or less traditional undergraduate setting but in a way that is especially relevant to the theme of this Congress, namely, the theme of "philosophy educating humanity." In my case, I teach philosophy but from a perspective that is non-traditional and which undercuts the standard questions originating from and orienting around a "philosophia perennia." Specifically, I teach philosophy of religion from the perspective of Jewish philosophy, and even more specifically, from the perspective of the French Jewish philosophy of Emmanuelle Levinas. Moreover, I teach philosophy in an educational environment that is representative of the greater global community because I teach at the University of Texas at El Paso, situated on the border that separates the United States and Latin America. Finally, my teaching situation is one that is further marginalized because of the precarious nature of my academic position, namely, trained outside the traditional borders of philosophical faculty and working at first as a part-timer and only recently as a full-time, non-tenure track teacher of philosophy and humanities. Hence, I offer my experience of doing work of successfully teaching philosophy "on the borders" in the hope that others gathered here will be challenged to think differently about their own way of educating others.
The Bible is read and interpreted by many people all over the world. Regardless, no one knows the absolute truth behind scripture. Walter Brueggemann, professor of Old Testament, wrote “Biblical Authority” to help people understand what he describes as six different parts that make up the foundation to ones understanding of scripture. He defines these six features as being: inherency, interpretation, imagination, ideology, inspiration, and importance. As Brueggemann explains each individual part, it is easy to see that they are all interconnected because no one can practice one facet without involuntarily practicing at least one other part.
Since the beginning of time, religion has played one of the most significant roles within human existence and has been believed to be the source whereby our governing laws have been derived. However, dating back to as early as the 3rd to 6th century, Greek philosophers inclusive of Diagoras of Melos, Euhemerus, alongside the schools of Hindu philosophy, Samkhya and the Greek Cyrenaic School were all amongst some of the first who did not accept the idea of God (Friedrich, 1942, 25). In the 7th century and during the Early Middle Ages, undergoing the Golden Age, the idea of knowledge was emphasised amongst the Muslim world, translating and collaborating knowledge from all over the world, giving rise to a group of people known as the Dahriyya who were the ‘holders of materialistic opinions of vari...
“The ordinary man needs philosophy because the claims of pleasure tempt him to become a self-deceiver and to argue sophistically against what appear to be the harsh demands of morality. This gives rise to what Kant calls a natural dialectic—a tendency to indulge in plausible arguments which contradict one another, and in this way to undermine the claims of duty. This may be disastrous to morality in practice, so disastrous that in the end ordinary human reason is to be found only in philosophy, and in particular in a critique of practical reason, which will trace our moral principle to its source in reason itself.”
Pope John Paul II once said, “Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth – in a word, to know himself – so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves.” (Fallible Blogma) Based on this significant and powerful quote, one can infer that faith and reason are directly associated and related. It can also be implied that the combination of faith and reason allows one to seek information and knowledge about truth and God; based on various class discussions and past academic teachings, it is understood that both faith and reason are the instruments that diverse parties are supposed to use on this search for truth and God. There are many stances and viewpoints on the issues of faith and reason. Some believe that both of these ideas cannot and should not be combined; these parties deem that faith and reason must be taken as merely separate entities. However, this writer does not understand why both entities cannot be combined; both terms are so closely compatible that it would make sense to combine the two for a common task. Based on various class discussions and readings, there are many philosophers and theologians who have certain opinions regarding faith, reason and their compatibility; these philosophers include Hildegard of Bingen, Ibn Rushd, Moses Maimonides, and St. Thomas Aquinas. The following essay will examine each of the previously stated philosopher’s viewpoints on faith and reason, and will essentially try to determine whether or not faith and reason are ultimately one in the same.
The thesis of this essay is that philosophy is at an important crossroads at the end of the twentieth century in its role as paideia—philosophy educating humanity. An unprecedented challenge and opportunity for philosophy today is to mediate, and enhance understanding of the relationship, between science, ethics and faith. A central question arises: What can philosophy contribute to the emerging dialogue between science and theology? The emerging science-theology dialogue is characterized by complexity and considerable confusion regarding proper methodologies, goals, and possible interactions. There are at least three major schools, model...
Abu Al-Walid Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Rushd, known in Latin as Averroes, was one of the most influential Islamic philosophers and scientist. He lived in a time where Philosophy was not celebrated in the Islamic world, and philosophers were regarded as unbelievers. He, however, revived the Aristotelian philosophy stressing that it has no conflict with the belief in God, and that was the theme he used throughout his writings. He integrated religion and philosophy challenging the anti-philosophical view of the Muslim scholars at that point. That influenced a group of western scholars who used the same examination and identified themselves as the “Averroists.”
Aquinas, in the Summa Theologiae, stated that, “Man should not seek to know what is above reason.” His argument was, in very simple terms, that men need reason to understand all of God’s truths. Yet there are certain truths that are beyond reason which men can only understand through Divine Revelation, or faith. And sometimes there might be certain aspects of faith that one day reason might have been able to prove but only a few men would know and understand this, so it is necessary that all men know this through Divine Revelation and faith.
When first looking at the relationship between philosophy and religion, I found it easier to explain the differences rather than the similarities. I began this paper the same way I do others. This generally involves a profound amount of research on the topic at hand. However, in contrast to the other papers I have done, the definitions of philosophy and religion only raised more questions for me. It was fascinating how the explanations differed dramatically from author to author.
Western philosophy has three fundamental eras. These are the ancient era, medieval era, and the modern era. The ancient era mostly incorporates the works of Roman and Greek thinkers, some of whom were influenced by mainly by the developments in Mesopotamia and Egypt. During the ancient period, Greek philosophy was dominant and most creative. The Romans also contributed their part, but they were primarily building on what the Greeks had come up with earlier. The Romans did not add any substantial part that could give them the recognition of Greek caliber. Medieval philosophy was heavily reliant on Christianity. It did have el...