Journals / Turkish Studies (Elektronik) / 2016 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 7

COMPARISION GHAZZÂLÎ'S AND THOMAS AQUINAS' CAUSALITY OPINIONS

GAZZÂLÎ VE THOMAS AQUİNAS'IN NEDENSELLİK GÖRÜŞLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Pages
85–100
Publication Date
2022-11-03
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

While Ghazzâlî criticizes the philosophers' viewwhich claim determinist relation between God and world as well asdeterminist order between cause and effect from the point of view ofoccasionalism; Aquinas, on the one hand accept the relation betweencause and effect and secondary causes by taking under considerationthe data of science and observation; on the other hand, he reject causeeffectnecessary relation which disable the will of God.In my study, first I will explain how Ghazzâlî's philosophytransmitted to Latin World, then examine that similarities anddifferences between Ghazzâlî's and Aquinas' causality concepts, thenwill determine how much Aquinas significantly affected by Ghazzâlî'sthought by analyzing and comparing their texts.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:I have compared Ghazzâlî's (d.1111) causality view who made hiscausality criticisms on logical ground and Thomas Aquinas' (d.1274)view who addressed causality issue in context of metaphysical andscientific data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The reason I have chosen Aquinas from Latin thought ishe affected by Ghazzâlî's criticisms that is directed to philosophers'causality view.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:While Ghazzâlî criticizes the philosophers' viewwhich claim determinist relation between God and world as well asdeterminist order between cause and effect from the point of view ofoccasionalism; Aquinas, on the one hand accept the relation betweencause and effect and secondary causes by taking under considerationthe data of science and observation; on the other hand, he reject causeeffectnecessary relation which disable the will of God.In my study, first I will explain how Ghazzâlî's philosophytransmitted to Latin World, then examine that similarities anddifferences between Ghazzâlî's and Aquinas' causality concepts, thenwill determine how much Aquinas significantly affected by Ghazzâlî'sthought by analyzing and comparing their texts.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

I have compared Ghazzâlî's (d.1111) causality view who made hiscausality criticisms on logical ground and Thomas Aquinas' (d.1274)view who addressed causality issue in context of metaphysical andscientific data. The reason I have chosen Aquinas from Latin thought ishe affected by Ghazzâlî's criticisms that is directed to philosophers'causality view. Ghazzâlî, in order to maintain the understanding thatGod is always the agent and to allow the miracle, he criticized thephilosophers' conception of causality that explaining causal relationshipbetween cause and effect based on His knowledge rather than His will.We can see a similar understanding Gazzâlî's occasionalist approach inAquinas's thought. While Ghazzâlî criticizes the philosophers' viewwhich claim determinist relation between God and world as well asdeterminist order between cause and effect from the point of view ofoccasionalism; Aquinas, on the one hand accept the relation betweencause and effect and secondary causes by taking under considerationthe data of science and observation; on the other hand, he reject causeeffectnecessary relation which disable the will of God.In my study, first I will explain how Ghazzâlî's philosophytransmitted to Latin World, then examine that similarities anddifferences between Ghazzâlî's and Aquinas' causality concepts, thenwill determine how much Aquinas significantly affected by Ghazzâlî'sthought by analyzing and comparing their texts.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, nedensellik eleştirilerini metafiziksel ve mantıksalbir zeminde ele alan Gazzâlî (d.1111) ile Latin düşüncesinde nedensellikgörüşünü hem metafiziksel hem de bilimsel veriler bağlamında ele alanThomas Aquinas'ın (d.1274) görüşlerini karşılaştırdık. Latindüşüncesinden Aquinas'ı ele almamızın nedeni, nedensellik anlayışınıtemellendirirken Gazzâlî'nin filozoflara yönelttiği nedensellikeleştirilerinden etkilenmesidir. Ghazzâlî, Tanrı'nın her daim failolduğunu vurgulamak ve mucizeye mahal açabilmek için neden ilesonuç arasındaki ilişkiyi Tanrı'nın iradesinden çok ilmine vurguyaparak temellendirmeye çalışan filozofların nedensellik anlayışlarınıeleştirmiştir. Benzer vesileci anlayışı Aquians'ın nedensellik görüşündede görmek mükündür. Gazzâlî, Tanrı ile âlem arasında olduğu kadaralemde de determinist bir düzenin olduğu görüşünü Tanrı'nın kudreti veözgür iradesini esas aldığı vesilecilik (occasyonalism) bağlamındaeleştirirken; Aquinas, bir yandan tabii bilimlerin ve gözlemlerimizinverilerini göz önünde bulundurarak sebep ile sonuç arasındaki ilişkiyive ikincil nedenlerin varlığını kabul etmekte, diğer yandan da Tanrı'nıniradesini devre dışı bırakan sebeb ile sonuç arasındaki zorunluluğureddetmektedir. Ayrıca Ghazzâlî nedensellik doktrinini daha çok nedensonuçilişkisinin mahiyeti bağlamında ele alırken; Aquinas isenedensellik doktrinini daha çok Tanrı'nın varlığını kanıtlamak ve O'nunİlk ve Nihai Neden olduğunu kanıtlamak için formüle ettiği Beş Yol'dan(quinque viae) biri olarak ele almıştır.Çalışmamızda, kısaca Gazzâlî'nin görüşlerinin Latin dünyasınageçiş sürecini ele aldıktan sonra, Gazzâlî ve Aquinas'ın nedensellikgörüşlerinin benzer ve farklılıklarını ve Aquinas'ın Gazzâlî'den ne ölçüdeetkilendiğini metin tahlili ve karşılaştırmalarıyla göstereceğiz.

🔖

Cite This Article

AZ, M. A. (2022). COMPARISION GHAZZÂLÎ'S AND THOMAS AQUINAS' CAUSALITY OPINIONS. Turkish Studies (Elektronik), Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 7, 85–100. https://ajindex.com/articles/617445

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Alon, Ilai. (1980). "Al-Ghazali on Causality". Journal of the American Oriental Society. V. 100. No. 4. 395-405.
  2. Aquinas, Thomas. (1945). Basic Writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas. C. I-II. Anton G. Pegis (ed.). New York: Random House. Aquinas, Thomas. (1963). Commentary on Aristotle's Physics. Richard J. Blackwell. Richard Spath, W. Edmund Thirlkel. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  3. Aquinas, Thomas. (1996). Commentary on the Book of Causes. Vincent A. Guagliardo, O.P., Charles R. Hess, O.P. and Richard C. Taylor. Washington: Catholic University of America Press.
  4. Aquinas, Thomas. (1961). Commentary on the Metaphysics of Aristotle. C.I-II. İngilizceye trc. John P. Rowan, Henry Chicago: Regnery Company. Aquinas, Thomas. (1970). Commentary on the Posterior Analytics of Aristotle. trc: F.R. Larcher. Albany, N.Y.: Magi Books. Aquinas, Thomas. (1991-97).
  5. De Aeternitate Mundi. Thomas Aquinas, Sancti Thomae De Aquino Opera Omnia, Leonine ed. Rome. 1976, 85-89; Latince'den İngilizce çevirisi için bkz. On the Eternity of the World. çev. Miller, Ti Robert. Aquinas, Thomas. (1998). Summa Theologica. vols. 5. trans: Fathers of the English Dominican Provinc. Ave Maria Press. 1998.
  6. Aquinas, Thomas. (1963). Commentary on Aristotle's Physics. trc. R. J. Blackwell. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  7. Aquinas, Thomas. (1956). On the Truth of the Catholic Faith: Summa Contra Gentiles. vol.4. trc. Anton C. Pegis. Image Books, Doubleday & Company, Inc. Aquinas, Thomas. (1952). On Power of God (De Potentia). Westminister, Md.: The Newman Press.
  8. Burnett, Charles. (2005). The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy. Adamson, Peter, Taylor, Richard C. (ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  9. De la Torre, Teodoro. (1988). Popular History of Philosophy. Houston: Lumen Christi Press.
  10. Fakhry, Majid. (1958). Islamic Occasionalism: and its Critique by Averroes and Aquinas. London: George Allen & Unwin. Gazzâlî. (2000). el-İktisâd fi'l İtikâd. Dr. Ali Bumelhem (thk.). Daru'l Mektebetu'l Hilal. Gazzâlî. (1998). İhya'u Ulum'id-Din. C.I-IV. trc. Sıtkı Gülle. İstanbul: Huzur Yayınları. Gazzâlî. (1961). Makâsidu'l Felâsife. Suleyman Dunya (thk.). Kahire: Daru'l Ma?arif. Gazzâlî. (1961). Miyaru'l 'ilm. Suleyman Dunya (thk.). Kahire: Daru'l Ma'arif. Gazzâlî. (1972). Tahâfutu'l Felâsife. thk. Sulayman Dunya. Kahire: Daru'l Ma'rif. Goff, Jacques Le. (1993). Intellectual in the Middle Ages. trc. Teresa Lavender Fagan. Cambridge and Oxford: Blackwell. Goodman, L. E. (1978). "Did al-Ghazali Deny Causalit