Ibn Sīnā

Open Access Article

1 - A Historical Study of the Theory of Induction
Moosa Malayeri

This study is intended to provide an answer to the following questions: Does induction generate certain knowledge or tentative conclusions? Is perfect induction possible or impossible? If it is impossible, could the addition of a supplement to imperfect induction result More

This study is intended to provide an answer to the following questions: Does induction generate certain knowledge or tentative conclusions? Is perfect induction possible or impossible? If it is impossible, could the addition of a supplement to imperfect induction result in certain and absolute judgments? In order to provide some answers to the raised questions, the writer has explored the historical development of the theory of induction and then discussed the theory adopted in this paper. This theory has not undergone many fluctuations in the history of Muslim thinkers’ logical thoughts and can be studied in three historical phases or periods. In the first phase, the greatest player of which was Fārābī and, more than him, Ibn Sīnā, induction was divided into perfect and imperfect types. At the same time, Fārābī explicitly stated that perfect induction is impossible and emphasized that imperfect induction results in uncertain conclusions. In order to compensate for the defects of induction, Ibn Sīnā demonstrated how the conclusions of an imperfect induction can be promoted to the level of an empirical judgment through using a compound syllogism and benefitting from the chance principle so that it would turn into an ensuring and certain conclusion. The main player of the second period is Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī. He maintained that imperfect induction does not yield certain results, and what has been interpreted as empirical judgment and placed within the category of certainties and even axioms is not anything more than an analogy. The third phase is characterized by the efforts and ideas of Muhammad Baqir Sadr, who believed that, although imperfect induction results in certain conclusions, the mentioned certainty, in contrast to Ibn Sīnā’s view, does not result from the mediation of a compound syllogism and the chance principle. He, rather, acknowledged that the certainty of inductive judgments arises from a specific feature of human intellect which persuades it to ignore fewer possible instances in the face of numerous possible ones. He calls this kind of certainty subjective certainty. The present paper, after reporting and analyzing the three- fold periods, demonstrates that the only defensible and justifiable standpoint regarding the theory of induction belongs to Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī and concludes that induction, whether by itself or with the help of a syllogism, yields nothing more than a tentative conclusion. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

2 - Methodology of Great Muslim Philosophers’ Encounter with the Translation Trend of the Abbassid Period
Seyyed Mohammadali Dibaji

Researchers in the field of Islamic studies in the West have chosen the name of “Translation Movement” to refer to the trend of the translation of the books of different nations into Arabic during the Abbasid period. This trend, which continued for two centuries in diff More

Researchers in the field of Islamic studies in the West have chosen the name of “Translation Movement” to refer to the trend of the translation of the books of different nations into Arabic during the Abbasid period. This trend, which continued for two centuries in different spontaneous or guided forms, received some reactions from the Islamic society. One of the important questions in this regard is what the attitude of the distinguished Muslim philosophers of that period, particularly al-Kindī, Fārābī and Ibn Sīnā, was to this movement. The present study indicates that, unlike the common response in the historiography of the translation trend, instead of a translation movement, during this time we are faced with a philosophical movement alongside a scientific one in the history of Islam. The philosophers mentioned above separated their judgments of three problems, namely, translation, translators and interpreters, and translated and interpreted works, from each other. Based on their own philosophical movement, which was in conformity with the principles of Islamic thought, they had three methodological, reformist, and critical reactions to this trend. They evaluated the translated works based on Islamic philosophical theorems and benefitted from them with some innovations in their own philosophical systems. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

3 - A Comparative Study of Poetics of Aristotle and Ibn Sīnā Regarding the Nature of Poetry
Farideh Daliri Esmail BaniArdalan Amir Maziyar

The nature and definition of poetry has always attracted the attention of literary thinkers in the field of philosophy. Aristotle’s Poetics is one of the greatest works on the content and structural criticisms of poetry. Given his Greek culture, Aristotle believes that More

The nature and definition of poetry has always attracted the attention of literary thinkers in the field of philosophy. Aristotle’s Poetics is one of the greatest works on the content and structural criticisms of poetry. Given his Greek culture, Aristotle believes that tragedy is an imitation of an action and a kind of dramatic art which results in catharsis. In Islamic tradition, the familiarity with Aristotle’s Poetics began from the third and fourth centuries (AH) through the related translations and abridged versions. During the same century, Fārābī and then Ibn Sīnā began analyzing and commenting on Poetics in order to explore Aristotle’s views in the realm of poetry. The most important abridgement of this treatise and commentary on it were made by Ibn Sīnā under the influence of Fārābī. In Ibn Sīnā’s treatise the concept of poetry is different from that in the field of conventional poetry. Imitation is the essence of poetry whereby imagination has an efficient presence. While trying to compare the nature of poetry in the Poetics section of Ibn Sīnā’s al-Shifā and Aristotle’s Poetics, this study aims to explain Ibn Sīnā’s view of poetry and his definition of poetry and its components and demonstrate the proximity between his standpoints in this regard with those of Aristotle. The authors have employed an analytic-descriptive and comparative approach to conduct this study. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

4 - An Evaluation of Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī’s Criticisms of Ibn Sīnā’s Argument Regarding the Finitude of Dimensions
Mahmoud Saidiy

20.1001.1.20089589.1400.11.4.8.7

The finitude of dimensions is one of the oldest problems of natural philosophy, the consequences of which have entered the realm of divine philosophy. The question is whether the dimensions of the world and each natural body is finite and limited or infinite and limitle More

The finitude of dimensions is one of the oldest problems of natural philosophy, the consequences of which have entered the realm of divine philosophy. The question is whether the dimensions of the world and each natural body is finite and limited or infinite and limitless. Aristotle was the first philosopher who studied this problem in the history of philosophy and ruled out the infinity of the dimensions of bodies and the natural world. In the same view, Ibn Sīnā maintained that the dimensions of body are finite and presented the three-fold arguments of correspondence, parallelism, and hierarchy in order to demonstrate this theory. Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī, who is the most important critic of Ibn Sīnā in the history of philosophy, advanced some criticisms against this theory of Ibn Sīnā. This study proves that most of Fakhr al-Rāzī’s misconceptions in this regard originate in mixing the mind with the outside and the principles of the nine-fold categories with the category of quantity. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

5 - Term and Definition Based on Sadrian and Sinan Philosophies
Narges Vanaei Mansur Imanpour Sohrab Haghighat

The discussion of definition has a particular place in epistemology and sometimes raises a number of complicated problems. One of these problems is the role of differentia in Ibn Sīnā’s epistemological system, which complicates delimiting the definition of things. This More

The discussion of definition has a particular place in epistemology and sometimes raises a number of complicated problems. One of these problems is the role of differentia in Ibn Sīnā’s epistemological system, which complicates delimiting the definition of things. This has gone beyond the realm of Peripatetic philosophy and affected other philosophers as well so that, when examining the source of this problem and the reasons behind the debates, they sometimes attribute the problem to the philosophical systems they follow. However, each has eventually tried to resolve the issue in a way based on their own philosophical views. Ibn Sīnā had to resort to logical differentia in order to solve the problem though he considers definition under such differentia to be descriptive and its role to be merely the distinction of definiens. Relying on his own philosophical principles and placing differentia among the concomitants of existence, he considered definition based on logical differentia similar to term and, in this way, promoted description to the level of term. Moreover because of the ontological mode which he introduced against the conceptual mode for differentia, he maintained that conceptual knowledge is not sufficient for knowing about the truth. Therefore, while emphasizing and acknowledging presential knowledge, he introduced it as a strategy to be used against Ibn Sīnā’s inability for presenting a term and a solution for the problem. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

6 - A Study of the Illuminationist Elements of Ibn Sīnā’s Works in the Realms of Method, Content, and Language
Saeed Rahimian

20.1001.1.20089589.1400.12.1.6.2

Although Ibn Sīnā was the master of Peripatetic philosophers, he also provided the bases for the development of Illuminationist philosophy. In terms of methodology and epistemology, through introducing Oriental wisdom, which, irrespective of the Greeks’ views, is his ow More

Although Ibn Sīnā was the master of Peripatetic philosophers, he also provided the bases for the development of Illuminationist philosophy. In terms of methodology and epistemology, through introducing Oriental wisdom, which, irrespective of the Greeks’ views, is his own specific school of philosophy, and also through employing certain terminology, principles, and arguments which are associated with Illuminationism, he prepared the context for the revival and growth of Illuminationist philosophy by Suhrawardī. Ibn Sīnā’s critical mind and spiritual worthiness during his short life efficiently paved the way for the surge of Islamic philosophy and wisdom towards Illuminationist philosophy and then the Transcendent Philosophy in terms of methodology, content, and language. Suhrawardī mainly emphasizes the differences between his school of philosophy and that of Ibn Sīnā and his Peripatetic followers and introduces the beginning of his philosophy as the end of Peripatetic philosophy. However, we can confidently claim that his philosophy is to such a large extent influenced by Ibn Sīnā’s that one can consider Suhrawardī’s school to have been the outcome of the natural growth of Sinan philosophy in the course of time. Through highlighting gnostic and intellectually intuitive (or what was later called Illuminationist) elements in Ibn Sīnā’s available works, the present paper aims to demonstrate that Suhrawardī’s debt to Ibn Sīnā in all the three fields of methodology, content, and language is much greater than what is commonly assumed. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

7 - A Critique of Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī’s Criticism of Ibn Sīnā’s View of the Truth of Knowledge
SeyedehZahra Mousavi Baygi Vahid Khademzadeh

20.1001.1.20089589.1400.12.3.4.4

Although Muslim Philosophers have not specifically discussed epistemological problems, they have extensively spoken of some general issues regarding knowledge. Ibn Sīnā has provided various definitions and explanations in relation to the nature of knowledge on different More

Although Muslim Philosophers have not specifically discussed epistemological problems, they have extensively spoken of some general issues regarding knowledge. Ibn Sīnā has provided various definitions and explanations in relation to the nature of knowledge on different occasions in many of his works. He has conceived of knowledge sometimes as pure quality, sometimes as quality possessing relation, and sometimes as pure relation. Moreover, he has interpreted knowledge as abstraction from matter in some of his works. Such a diversity of interpretations has given an excuse to some people such as Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī to criticize and question Ibn Sīnā’s view of the truth of knowledge. In different places in his works, Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī emphasizes that Ibn Sīnā’s view of knowledge was divided, and he failed to attain a single standpoint concerning the truth of knowledge. The present study, which was conducted following an analytic-descriptive method and a critical approach, firstly presents Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī’s claim and, then, evaluates its truth. Next, the authors delve into his other works to examine the definitions of knowledge in his view. The findings of this study demonstrate that, although there are some fundamental problems in Ibn Sīnā’s view, his words are based on his own principles, are solid, and can be reduced to a unitary view. However, Rāzī’s words on this problem are inconsistent. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

8 - Theoretical Changes about the Faculty of Estimation in the Course of Historical Development of Islamic Philosophy
Mohammad-Ali Ardestani

20.1001.1.20089589.1400.12.1.8.4

The faculty of estimation is one of the inner, particular, and perceptive powers of the soul that plays a significant role in particular cognitions, and without which it is impossible to organize and balance life affairs. Its potential of transcending the realm of meani More

The faculty of estimation is one of the inner, particular, and perceptive powers of the soul that plays a significant role in particular cognitions, and without which it is impossible to organize and balance life affairs. Its potential of transcending the realm of meanings has placed it on top of all inner particular powers. Following a descriptive-analytic evaluation method, the present paper examines the development of the views of Muslim philosophers in this regard. Three important theories stand out in this process. In their quest to attribute a specific source to each kind of perception, Peripatetic philosophers consider the faculty of estimation to be independent from others, place it alongside the faculties of sensation, imagination, and intellect, and emphasize that it can perceive the nature of all specific universals. Accordingly, perceptions are divided in two four sensory, imaginative, estimative, and rational types. Among the followers of the Transcendent Philosophy, some philosophers such as Mullā Hādī Sabziwārī have advocated the Peripatetics on this ground, but Mullā Ṣadrā and ‘Allāmah Ṭabāṭabā’ī have criticized this theory each in their own way. Mullā Ṣadrā has promoted the faculty of estimation to the level of the intellect and placed it at the level of revealed intellect. Accordingly, perceptions are divided into three sensory, imaginative, and rational types. However, ‘Allāmah Ṭabāṭabā’ī has attributed the faculty of estimation to the common sense and demoted its status to the level of the senses. He acknowledges the unity of sensory, imaginative, and estimative perceptions. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

9 - A Study of the Sinan System of Definition: An Analysis of Ibn Sīnā’s Encounter with Aristotle and Fārābī
Mohammad Hosseinzadeh

20.1001.1.20089589.1400.12.2.5.3

The Sinan approach to the theory of definition is an explanation and expanded from of Aristotelian definition. He has accepted Aristotle’s definition of objects based on analyzing their quiddity in terms of their genus and differentia and extended it. Moreover, Ibn Sīnā More

The Sinan approach to the theory of definition is an explanation and expanded from of Aristotelian definition. He has accepted Aristotle’s definition of objects based on analyzing their quiddity in terms of their genus and differentia and extended it. Moreover, Ibn Sīnā has added some innovative views to it that have not received the attention that they truly deserve, and researchers have not explained and organized them in a consistent and structured from. Following a descriptive-analytic method, this paper explains the theory of Sinan definition within a consistent framework and analyzes the quality of Ibn Sīnā’s encounter with the views of Aristotle and Fārābī. Moreover, it refers to Ibn Sīnā’s innovations regarding the problem of definition and, by emphasizing its less studied aspects, responds to the following questions: to what extent is the unknown nature of objects’ differentia consistent with Ibn Sīnā’s theory on the definition and knowledge of objects? Does the theory of Sinan definition merely target quiddative affairs, or does it also extend to non-quiddative affairs? Which mechanism does Ibn Sīnā provide for defining non-quiddative affairs? Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

10 - An Evaluation of Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī’s Criticisms of Ibn Sīnā’s Arguments on the Falsity of Vacuum
Mahmud Seidy

20.1001.1.20089589.1401.12.4.4.0

One of the problems that has always been discussed during the history of Islamic philosophy is the possibility or impossibility of vacuum. The problem is whether one can imagine a place or space in which there is no body. Aristotle was one of the philosophers that criti More

One of the problems that has always been discussed during the history of Islamic philosophy is the possibility or impossibility of vacuum. The problem is whether one can imagine a place or space in which there is no body. Aristotle was one of the philosophers that criticized the theory of vacuum and presented some arguments in this regard. Following Aristotle, Ibn Sīnā discussed this problem and provided some arguments in support of his views. These arguments have been adduced on the equality or sameness of the dimensions of vacuum, mobility of bodies in vacuum, forcible motion in open air, and non-temporality of physical motion in vacuum. Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī has referred to several defects of these arguments, which are critically investigated in this paper. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

11 - A Comparative Study of the Problem of Evil in Plotinus and Ibn Sīnā (With a Focus on its Historical Aspect)
Mahmud Seidy

20.1001.1.20089589.1402.13.4.5.8

The present paper deals with a comparative study of the views of Plotinus and Ibn Sīnā regarding evil. In spite of the existing differences concerning this problem in their philosophies, there are also some similarities, and Ibn Sīnā is influenced by Plotinus with respe More

The present paper deals with a comparative study of the views of Plotinus and Ibn Sīnā regarding evil. In spite of the existing differences concerning this problem in their philosophies, there are also some similarities, and Ibn Sīnā is influenced by Plotinus with respect to his response to the problem of evil. Among the similarities between them in this area, one can refer to the self-evident nature of the existence of evil, exclusivity of the realization of evil to the world of matter and the impossibility of its realization in the immaterial world, and the non-existence nature of evil and good nature of all beings based on a general view of the world. However, unlike Plotinus, Ibn Sīnā does not consider matter as being essentially evil and non-existential. Rather, he maintains that matter is a correlative, analogical, and existential thing. Plotinus views the relationship between good and evil of the type of opposition, while Ibn Sīnā sees it as a non-existential and habitual one. Moreover, according to Plotinus, matter or the same essentially evil thing is created from the particular spirit. Nevertheless, Ibn Sīnā argues that the essential possibility of the Active intellect causes the emanation of matter, and its otherness necessity aspect results in the emanation of form, on which evil sometimes occurs to. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

12 - Fārābī and Islamic Peripatetic Philosophy in the First European Universities
Reza Mahoozi

20.1001.1.20089589.1402.13.4.7.0

Fārābī, the renowned Iranian philosopher, is one of the central figures of Peripatetic philosophy in the world of Islam. The collection of his thoughts travelled beyond Islamic borders to Asian, Europe and Africa posthumously and influenced the scientific fields of Jewi More

Fārābī, the renowned Iranian philosopher, is one of the central figures of Peripatetic philosophy in the world of Islam. The collection of his thoughts travelled beyond Islamic borders to Asian, Europe and Africa posthumously and influenced the scientific fields of Jewish, Christian, and other non-Islamic lands. The thoughts of Fārābī and two other prominent figures of this school of philosophy, Ibn Sīnā and Ibn Rushd, exercised an undeniable impact on the development of the higher scientific centers of Europe of the 13-15 centuries (AD). In fact, without considering their role in the formation of the first European universities, especially the university of Paris and the process of establishing the faculty of philosophy during the conflict between the two faculties of theology and art, one cannot attain a true knowledge of the reasons behind the development and expansion of the first European universities. Relying on valid historical documents and reports, this paper explains this influential process and, at the same time, portrays one of the routes of the transfer of Muslims’ culture and philosophical thoughts to Europe and the quality of the formation of the institution of university during that time. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

13 - From Imaginal Faculty to Imagination: A Review of the Evolution of the Concept of Imagination in the Philosophical Systems of Fārābī, Ibn Sīnā, Suhrawardī, and Mullā Ṣadrā
Ibrahim Bazargani

20.1001.1.20089589.1402.14.1.6.6

Imagination is one of the human perceptive faculties that is shared with animals. This concept, which has been transferred from Greek philosophy to Muslims’ philosophical tradition, has always been a very important problem with various functions in the self-knowledge of More

Imagination is one of the human perceptive faculties that is shared with animals. This concept, which has been transferred from Greek philosophy to Muslims’ philosophical tradition, has always been a very important problem with various functions in the self-knowledge of Muslim philosophers from Fārābī to Mullā Ṣadrā. It has even been used in responding to some kalāmī inquiries. Since the very beginning, Muslim philosophers have continuously devoted some of their studies to the investigation and explanation of the whatness and howness of the concept of imagination. However, this concept has not remained immune against change and has developed a distinct meaning in each philosophical system. In the history of Islamic philosophy, the three-fold schools of philosophy (Peripatetic philosophy, Illuminationist philosophy, and the Transcendent Philosophy) have each adopted a particular and different approach to this problem. The present study intends to examine the theories of some great figures of Islamic philosophy regarding the whatness of the faculty of imagination and reveal the existing differences among them. The findings indicate that philosophers’ views of the concept of imagination have not been fixed and similar in the course of history, and each has presented a specific and innovative explanation of this concept in conformity with their own philosophical system. For example, Fārābī considered this faculty to be a material component of the soul, while Mullā Ṣadrā changed it into the world of Ideas. This study was conducted following a descriptive-comparative method using library resources. Manuscript profile

Open Access Article

14 - Labyrinth of the World: Deconstruction of Nicolaus Cusanus’ Perception of Substance Based on the Views of Meister Eckhart and Ibn Sīnā
Ebrahim Ranjbar Mohammadreza Asadi

20.1001.1.20089589.1402.14.2.6.8

Nicolaus Cusanus, the German Philosopher and theologian, tried to revise the metaphysical views of his time in his works. He tried to present his philosophical approach systematically by posing a number of innovative theories about creation, Man’s relationship with the More

Nicolaus Cusanus, the German Philosopher and theologian, tried to revise the metaphysical views of his time in his works. He tried to present his philosophical approach systematically by posing a number of innovative theories about creation, Man’s relationship with the infinite affair, motion, and knowledge, as well as by revising the common religious views regarding such theorems as the first sin and creation out of nothing. Here, the authors have initially tried to examine Cusanus’ important views about the relationship between Man and the infinite affair, and through which reveal that, from this point of view, there is only one substance in the world, and anything other than that is among its necessary accidents. Next, they propound the concepts of unfolding and folding and introduce a category called the trans-substantial motion in Cusanus’ specific reading. After discussing his views, the background of the formation of his approach are deconstructed. In doing so, Meister Eckhart’s interpretation of some sections of the Holy Book and some of Ibn Sīnā’s fundamental metaphysical views are presented. Then the authors argue that Ibn Sīnā’s innovative approaches and Meister Eckhart’s novel interpretations pave the context for postulating a new metaphysics that is different from the traditional one. This can introduce new perspectives for philosophical studies and shed a new light on the history of philosophical thought. Manuscript profile

Current Issue

Published Issues

Menu

Browse

List of Articles Ibn Sīnā