Readings on the Definition and Arguments towards Atheism among Muslim Theologians and Philosophers

IF 0.4 0 RELIGION
Mohamad Razif Mohamad Fuad, M. F. Hamat, Mohd Khairul Naim Che Nordin, Mohammad Abdelhamid Salem Qatawneh
{"title":"Readings on the Definition and Arguments towards Atheism among Muslim Theologians and Philosophers","authors":"Mohamad Razif Mohamad Fuad, M. F. Hamat, Mohd Khairul Naim Che Nordin, Mohammad Abdelhamid Salem Qatawneh","doi":"10.22452/afkar.vol24no1.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to discuss a preliminary analysis of responses by classical and contemporary Muslim scholars on Atheism and New Atheism and identify the approaches that have been taken by them. It also elucidates on type of arguments used by those scholars. While there are many studies about Atheism, New Atheism, and Islam, few or none of them preliminary analysed the works of classical and contemporary Muslim scholars. Selected books written by classical and contemporary Muslim scholars on Atheism and New Atheism were preliminarily reviewed and examined. This study found that the critiques of classical and contemporary Muslim scholars are constructive, systemic, and systematic in upholding the ʿaqīdah. Five renowned and essential rational arguments that are frequently used by classical and contemporary Muslim scholars are the ontological argument, argument from contingency, kalām cosmological argument, teleological argument, and moral argument. The researcher also believes that these respective arguments must also undergo reform (islāh), renewal (tajdīd), and constant improvement in areas or matters that are subject to change over time (mutaghayyirāt).","PeriodicalId":53770,"journal":{"name":"Afkar-Jurnal Akidah & Pemikiran Islam-Journal of Aqidah & Islamic Thought","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Afkar-Jurnal Akidah & Pemikiran Islam-Journal of Aqidah & Islamic Thought","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22452/afkar.vol24no1.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aims to discuss a preliminary analysis of responses by classical and contemporary Muslim scholars on Atheism and New Atheism and identify the approaches that have been taken by them. It also elucidates on type of arguments used by those scholars. While there are many studies about Atheism, New Atheism, and Islam, few or none of them preliminary analysed the works of classical and contemporary Muslim scholars. Selected books written by classical and contemporary Muslim scholars on Atheism and New Atheism were preliminarily reviewed and examined. This study found that the critiques of classical and contemporary Muslim scholars are constructive, systemic, and systematic in upholding the ʿaqīdah. Five renowned and essential rational arguments that are frequently used by classical and contemporary Muslim scholars are the ontological argument, argument from contingency, kalām cosmological argument, teleological argument, and moral argument. The researcher also believes that these respective arguments must also undergo reform (islāh), renewal (tajdīd), and constant improvement in areas or matters that are subject to change over time (mutaghayyirāt).
解读穆斯林神学家和哲学家对无神论的定义和争论
本研究旨在讨论古典和当代穆斯林学者对无神论和新无神论的反应的初步分析,并确定他们所采取的方法。它还阐明了这些学者使用的论点类型。虽然有许多关于无神论、新无神论和伊斯兰教的研究,但很少或根本没有对古典和当代穆斯林学者的作品进行初步分析。对古典和当代穆斯林学者关于无神论和新无神论的著作进行了初步的评析。本研究发现,古典和当代穆斯林学者的批评在维护《古兰经》方面具有建设性、系统性和系统性。古典和当代穆斯林学者经常使用的五个著名和重要的理性论证是本体论论证、偶然性论证、kalām宇宙论论证、目的论论证和道德论证。研究人员还认为,这些各自的论点也必须经历改革(islāh),更新(tajdj),并在随着时间的推移而变化的领域或事项上不断改进(mutaghayyirāt)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
60.00%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信