Skepticism and Rationality:Ghazali, Hume, and Kant

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Abstract

Considering three philosophers – Ghazali , Hume, and Kant – we perceive that they were at grips with skepticism and each had a different attitude towards it. While Hume remains in a skeptical sphere, Ghazali and Kant offer solutions for skepticism, although their solutions differ largely. Criticizing Aristotle’s view on essential necessity, Ghazali expands Avicenna’s emphasis on experimentation and, in effect, negates the necessary relation between cause and effect. Ghazali preceded Hume in this regard for some 6 centuries and put forward Hume’s main idea. In order to overcome skepticism, Kant appealed to rationality and it’s a  priori backgrounds, while Ghazali put forward God’s will and put the emphasis on the inner direct experience. It will be argued that God’s deeds, rationality and faith should be compatible in principle.

Keywords

References

1. Nadler, S. (1996). “No Necessary Connection”. The Monist 79 (3):448-466.   
2. Sheikh, S. (1369). Comparative Studies in Islamic Philosophy, trans. Muhaghegh Damad, Tehran: Amir Kabir; MacDonald, D.B. (1903). Development of Muslim theology, jurisprudence and constitutional theory. London: Gregory Routledge & Sons.
3. Hume, D. (1975). An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. Nidditch, P. N. (ed.), 3rd. ed., Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. 26.
4. Kant, I. (1966). Critique of pure reason. Tr. Werner S. Pluhar. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, section 13.
5. Griffel, F. (2009). Al-Ghazali's philosophical theology. Oxford University Press, p. 210-211.
6.Ghazali, M. (1963). Incoherence of the philosophers. Trans. Sabih Ahmad Kamali. Pakistan Philosophical Congress, Lahore, p. 186.
7. al-Munqidh, 32, 5-11, cited in Griffel, F. (2009). Al-Ghazali's philosophical theology. Oxford University Press, p. 196
8. Ghazali, al-Munqidh, 44, 1-3; cited in Griffel, F. (2009). Al-Ghazali's philosophical theology. Oxford University Press, p. 197.
9. Ghazali, M. (1963). Incoherence of the philosophers. Trans: Sabih Ahmad Kamali. Pakistan Philosophical Congress, Lahore
10. Riker, S. (1996). Al-Ghazali on necessary causality in The Incoherence of the Philosophers. The Monist 79 (3): 315-324, p. 324.
11. Griffel, F. (2012). Al-Ghazālī's Use of “Original Human Disposition” (Fiṭra) and Its Background in the Teachings of al-Fārābī and Avicenna, The Muslim World (102):1, Pages 1–209, p. 21.
12. Avicenna's al-Shefa, al-Mantiq, al-Burhan, p. 65.5-6, cited from Griffel, F. (2012). Al-Ghazālī's Use of “Original Human Disposition” (Fiṭra) and Its Background in the Teachings of al-Fārābī and Avicenna, The Muslim World (102):1, Pages 1–209, p. 21.
 
Journal of Religious Thought : A Quarterly Journal of Shiraz University
Volume 13, Issue 47 - Serial Number 47
September 2013
Pages 173-191

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics