Talk:Early Muslim philosophy
|
|
Would the author(s) of this page take a look at the already existing article on Islamic philosophy? These articles should be merged together. Unless, of course, one wishes to create a detailed article only on early forms of Islamic philosophy, and a separate article on later forms of Islamic philosophy. In that case having two separate entries would be appropriate. However, this does not currently seem to be the case. Any thoughts? RK
a good start
I do not have any background in this area, other than some superficial readings. These comments may look like a teacher's marginal comments on a homework assignment, but they are actually a reader's request for more information or clarification.
First paragraph: is “influences” the right word? Looks more like phases to me.
Second paragraph: I cannot make sense out of the last sentence. In addition, is “literally millions” accurate for each of these scholars? As for them, while links allow the reader to learn more about them, it would be good if someone could say more about each of them, putting them in both chronological order and order of importance and tracing their inflluences on each other, in this article.
Third paragraph: this is a good place to explain ijtihad and fiqh; links are good but not enough. Some chronology would be good here, as well as at least identification of the key writers and thinkers, even if we do not develop new pages for each of them.
Fourth paragraph: where is Avicenna [sorry for the bastardized Western version]? Averroes [same apology]? What do we mean “the procedural traditions of Islam”? More details please. A link to the longer article on Islamic philosophy is a start, but some sort of merger/reorganization/editing as proposed by the earlier poster may also be necessary if this page is to survive in anything like its current form.
Fifth paragraph: the word “had” in the second sentence confuses me. In addition, I cannot tell whether the peak occurred just as the Asharite school entered the stage or thereafter and whether we are giving any credit to the Asharite school for that peak. While the content suggests we are not, the organization of the sentence suggests that we are. More detail, particularly on the political influence of the new Ottoman Empire on the new orthodoxy, would also be welcome here.
Sixth paragraph: much more can and should be said here about the influence of Averroes and Avicenna on Western philosophy and the transmission of earlier texts. But are we treating Islamic philosophy as a closed book after the 14th Century? More detail on this is needed; a link to the article on modern Islamic philosophy is a first step, but not sufficient. Also, someone needs to elaborate on the subject of "Muslim works taken in Spain" and contrast this phenomenon with earlier transmissions.
And that leads to another question: is “early” a misnomer for the title of this work, considering that it covers nearly 800 years of development?
Perhaps this page should be used as the first draft of an opening overview to the longer article on Islamic philosophy and this page and name saved for a more detailed discussion of the development of kalam, ijtihad and fiqh. In that case the larger article will also have to incorporate modern Islamic philosophy, but that is a subject for a different talk page.
Achievement?
- recognition that science and philosophy are both subordinate to morality, and that moral choices are prior to any investigation or concern with either.
I'm not sure if this would be an achievement or if rather this concept is the one which "closed the door on ijtihad". That and current day islamic type people have a differnt impression of ijtihad than the one I seem to be getting. Hmph.
I'll ask around.
80.126.238.189 15:56, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)