Although many philosophers have spoken of the classification of sciences, none have referred to a single one agreed upon by all. Here, both the source of division and the divisions are different from each other in each classification, when classifying sciences, Ikhwan a
More
Although many philosophers have spoken of the classification of sciences, none have referred to a single one agreed upon by all. Here, both the source of division and the divisions are different from each other in each classification, when classifying sciences, Ikhwan al-Safa consider pure types of knowledge and, initially, divide them into two theoretical and practical arts. However, Farabi divides scientific rather than pure types of knowledge and classifies them into two instrumental and non-instrumental sciences based on their functions. In the classification of Ikhwan al-Safa, drawing on the neo-Platonic approach, the place of the soul, politics, logic, and ethics are different from that in the classification of the Peripatetics, such as Farabi. The most important basis for classification of sciences in the view of Ikhwan al-Safa is the end. Nevertheless, similar to Aristotle, Farabi relies on two main criteria for the classification of sciences: end and subject. This paper, in addition to examining the differences between Ikhwan al-Safa and Farabi in their classification of sciences, discusses the specific place of some of sciences from their points of view.
Manuscript profile
