seyed mohammad javad seyed hashemi; mohammad reza karimi vala; mohsen izadi
Abstract
Ghazali is one of the Islamic scholars with research works in the field of jurisprudence, ethics, theology and philosophy. Despite his alleged opposition to philosophy and philosophical thinking, his works shows, especially in topics related to psychology, that he is a rationalist thinker who has benefited ...
Read More
Ghazali is one of the Islamic scholars with research works in the field of jurisprudence, ethics, theology and philosophy. Despite his alleged opposition to philosophy and philosophical thinking, his works shows, especially in topics related to psychology, that he is a rationalist thinker who has benefited from the methods and approaches of Islamic philosophers. In the present article, using a descriptive-analytical method, we have surveyed Ghazali's views on logic and philosophy and their application in psychology and we have come to the conclusion that, contrary to the opinion of some researchers who have considered Ghazali a strict anti-philosophy theologian, he should be considered a rationalist theologian who, in allstages of his life, even when he turned to Sufism, remained loyal to rational principles and methods and considered reason to be the most important criterion for the validity of any kind of knowledge. In psychology, he is totally influenced by peripatetic philosophy, and due to his strong attachment to Ibn Sina's philosophical method in psychology, he sometimes borrow words from his books to support his own views. He adheres to logical arguments and considers reason as the criterion for testing the validity of other means of knowledge, that is, tradition, experience and intuition. According to some of Ghazali's theoretical foundations such as the negation of causality between phenomena, it seems that, by replacing causality with the theory of habit of Allah, he has managed to solve some of the requirements of the negation of causality in psychology. But such a theory is not free of ambiguities and problems.
mojtaba ghorbani; Ahmad ghaffari gharebagh
Volume 19, Issue 3 , January 0, , Pages 1-16
Abstract
In one classification, all of the sciences are divided into instrumental and original. Sciences such as logic, the principles of jurisprudence and algebra are classified as instrumental sciences, and other sciences such as philosophy, jurisprudence and arithmetic as the original ones. Instrumentality ...
Read More
In one classification, all of the sciences are divided into instrumental and original. Sciences such as logic, the principles of jurisprudence and algebra are classified as instrumental sciences, and other sciences such as philosophy, jurisprudence and arithmetic as the original ones. Instrumentality and originality are two terms that are in fact not defined clearly. To understand the criterion which distinguishes these two sciences, one must rely on the common sense of the scientologists of the two terms. Different sciences have a cooperative relationship with each other and in solving the issues of one science other sciences are involved; however, the use of one science in another cannot be regarded as a criterion of instrumentality of that science. Also, personal aims of the creators and users of the sciences cannot be a true criterion for this categorization. In the present article, by rejecting personal opinion and relativity, a general criterion for a science to be instrumental is presented. The main benefit of a science because of which the wise agree on its necessity in the body of human knowledge can be a criterion for this classification. In this article, the science of logic as an instrumental science has been the focus of discussion, although the criteria presented has nothing to do with logic.
