{"title":"关系是上帝对tahĀfut al-tahĀfut和ḌamĪma中细节知识的关键:阿维罗伊斯、al -ĠazĀlĪ和阿维森纳之间的串音","authors":"J. Brenet","doi":"10.1017/S0957423919000109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article deals with the divine knowledge of particulars in Averroes’ Tahāfut al-tahāfut and Ḍamīma. It examines how the concept of relation, generally neglected, is at the heart of the dispute between Avicenna, al-Ġazālī, and the Commentator. In al-Ġazālī’s eyes, Avicenna's misconception of divine knowledge “in a universal way” is based on a misuse of relation in the case of God's knowledge. If particulars change and God does not, his knowledge of particulars, insofar as it undergoes change, can be considered a pure relation without ontological consequences. Averroes contests both al-Ġazālī’s criticism and his proposal, despite the fact that, for different reasons involving the coming-to-be of human knowledge, he too employs the notion of pure relation in his Long Commentary on the Physics.","PeriodicalId":43433,"journal":{"name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"1 1","pages":"1 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"RELATION AS KEY TO GOD'S KNOWLEDGE OF PARTICULARS IN THE TAHĀFUT AL-TAHĀFUT AND THE ḌAMĪMA: A CROSS-TALK BETWEEN AVERROES, AL-ĠAZĀLĪ AND AVICENNA\",\"authors\":\"J. Brenet\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0957423919000109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article deals with the divine knowledge of particulars in Averroes’ Tahāfut al-tahāfut and Ḍamīma. It examines how the concept of relation, generally neglected, is at the heart of the dispute between Avicenna, al-Ġazālī, and the Commentator. In al-Ġazālī’s eyes, Avicenna's misconception of divine knowledge “in a universal way” is based on a misuse of relation in the case of God's knowledge. If particulars change and God does not, his knowledge of particulars, insofar as it undergoes change, can be considered a pure relation without ontological consequences. Averroes contests both al-Ġazālī’s criticism and his proposal, despite the fact that, for different reasons involving the coming-to-be of human knowledge, he too employs the notion of pure relation in his Long Commentary on the Physics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0957423919000109\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0957423919000109","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
RELATION AS KEY TO GOD'S KNOWLEDGE OF PARTICULARS IN THE TAHĀFUT AL-TAHĀFUT AND THE ḌAMĪMA: A CROSS-TALK BETWEEN AVERROES, AL-ĠAZĀLĪ AND AVICENNA
Abstract This article deals with the divine knowledge of particulars in Averroes’ Tahāfut al-tahāfut and Ḍamīma. It examines how the concept of relation, generally neglected, is at the heart of the dispute between Avicenna, al-Ġazālī, and the Commentator. In al-Ġazālī’s eyes, Avicenna's misconception of divine knowledge “in a universal way” is based on a misuse of relation in the case of God's knowledge. If particulars change and God does not, his knowledge of particulars, insofar as it undergoes change, can be considered a pure relation without ontological consequences. Averroes contests both al-Ġazālī’s criticism and his proposal, despite the fact that, for different reasons involving the coming-to-be of human knowledge, he too employs the notion of pure relation in his Long Commentary on the Physics.
期刊介绍:
Arabic Sciences and Philosophy (ASP) is an international journal devoted to the Arabic sciences, mathematics and philosophy in the world of Islam between the eighth and eighteenth centuries, in a cross-cultural context. In 2009, the journal extended its scope to include important papers on scientific modernization from the nineteenth century in the Islamic world. Together with original studies on the history of all these fields, ASP also offers work on the inter-relations between Arabic and Greek, Indian, Chinese, Latin, Byzantine, Syriac and Hebrew sciences and philosophy. Casting new light on the growth of these disciplines, as well as on the social and ideological context in which this growth took place, ASP is essential reading for those interested in these areas.