How do models of God’s agency change between Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, and Ibn Rushd? Why? Is the change successful?
The Islamic philosophers Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd discuss Gods agency. They do however differ on the extent to what gods attributes are and his role in the universe. While Al-Farabi has a more of neo-platonic take, Ibn-Sina has Aristotelian approach and Ibn Rushd’s take is more of a reconciliation between Islam and the principles of philosophy.
Al-Farabi Part (2 paragraphs, around 500 words)
Similar to al-Farabi, Ibn sina had a Neoplatonic emanationist scheme of existence with an Aristotelian approach. Opposing to the classical Muslim theologians, he argues that the universe has no beginning and no end and that it …show more content…
Since Al-Farabi is the “Father of Islamic Neoplatonism” it’s expected that his writings would be dominated by Neoplatonic dimensions. Same goes for Ibn Sina who combines his Aristotelianism with a religious interest in order to for the interpretation to match his principles and believes. For Ibn-Rushd, he tries to reconcile philosophy with Islam and modifies his interpretation to follow the scripture and make it compatible with Islam. All three philosophers were criticized for having concepts that contradict with Islam one way or another. However out of the three Ibn Rushd was the most successful in reconciling philosophy and Islam in order to make his philosophies more suitable for Muslims as he suggests that God’s knowledge is superior and unique because he is not limited to receiving information from the world, as is the case with finite creatures like humans. He is the creator of all objects in the world, and he knows them in a more perfect and complete way than we can hope to attain. This suggests that God cannot know individuals as such. The best knowledge is abstract and universal, and this is the sort of knowledge which God can be thought to enjoy
The Islamic philosophers Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd discuss Gods agency. They do however differ on the extent to what gods attributes are and his role in the universe. While Al-Farabi has a more of neo-platonic take, Ibn-Sina has Aristotelian approach and Ibn Rushd’s take is more of a reconciliation between Islam and the principles of philosophy.
Al-Farabi Part (2 paragraphs, around 500 words)
Similar to al-Farabi, Ibn sina had a Neoplatonic emanationist scheme of existence with an Aristotelian approach. Opposing to the classical Muslim theologians, he argues that the universe has no beginning and no end and that it …show more content…
Since Al-Farabi is the “Father of Islamic Neoplatonism” it’s expected that his writings would be dominated by Neoplatonic dimensions. Same goes for Ibn Sina who combines his Aristotelianism with a religious interest in order to for the interpretation to match his principles and believes. For Ibn-Rushd, he tries to reconcile philosophy with Islam and modifies his interpretation to follow the scripture and make it compatible with Islam. All three philosophers were criticized for having concepts that contradict with Islam one way or another. However out of the three Ibn Rushd was the most successful in reconciling philosophy and Islam in order to make his philosophies more suitable for Muslims as he suggests that God’s knowledge is superior and unique because he is not limited to receiving information from the world, as is the case with finite creatures like humans. He is the creator of all objects in the world, and he knows them in a more perfect and complete way than we can hope to attain. This suggests that God cannot know individuals as such. The best knowledge is abstract and universal, and this is the sort of knowledge which God can be thought to enjoy