Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userThe Moral Question between Aristotle and Averroes
السؤال الأخلاقي بين أرسطو و ابن رشد
2225
6 53
0
(
0
)
Created by
Shamra Editor
Ask ChatGPT about the research
يهدف هذا البحث إلى دراسة المسألة الأخلاقية بين الموقف الأرسطي و الرشدي. و يتناول بالدراسة و التحليل رأي كل منهما في ثلاث مسائل أساسية و هي: - أصل الأخلاق و مجالها. - نظرية الفضيلة. - أصناف الفضائل و ترتيبها. و انطلاقاً من معالجتنا لهذه القضايا سنعمل على تحديد مدى التقارب و الاختلاف بين الفيلسوفين بهذا الشأن. و عليه سنحاول تبيان الأثر الأرسطي الأخلاقي في الفضاء الفكري العربي الإسلامي ممثلاً بابن رشد، الذي وظّف فهمه للأخلاق الأرسطية في عملية قراءة و تحليل جمهورية أفلاطون. و في ضوء ما تقدّم نطرح تساؤلاً مشروعاً: هل كان لابن رشد نظرية مستقلّة في الأخلاق، أم أنّه سار على نهج من سبقوه و بالأخص أرسطو في مقاربته للمسألة الأخلاقية؟
The study of the ethical issue in the Aristotelian attitude and Averroes one is the aim of this research. It also studies and analyzes the point of view of each one of them in three fields which are: • The originality of ethics and its field • The virtue theory • Virtues varieties and arrangements According to our dealing with this case, we work on specifying the degree of similarities and differences between the two philosophers. We try to show the Aristotelian moral effect in the Islamic_ Arab intellectual space represented by Averroes whose understanding of Aristotelian ethics in the process of reading and analyzing Plato Republic. In the light of the above, we have the right to ask whether Averroes has an independent ethical theory or he followed the approach of his predecessors, especially Aristotle in his similarity with his ethical issue.
References used
ابن رشد, تلخيص الخطابة, تحقيق محمد سليم سالم, القاهرة, 1967.
ابن رشد, تلخيص السياسة, ترجمة حسن مجيد العبيدي, دار التكوين, دمشق, 2008.
rate research
Read More
Studies and research about rhetoric have varied concerning the definition of rhetoric,
but most of them look at rhetoric from on side only. Rhetoric was classified as being a kind
of research concerned with the art of persuasion in its techniques,
means and components.
But it is certain that the political and social conditions of the greak life, led these
philosophical studies and linguistic research especially, rhetoric. This made Aristotle
divide rhetoric into three sections.
The research delt with two main titles, the first one was Rhetoric according to
Aristotle. It combines between mans ability to speak and express on one hand becavse man
is a speaker and expressor who naturally looks for persuasion. In his speech, he tries to
convince as many people as possible. To do this, he uses many instinctive means. Aristotle
was concerned with rhetoric due to its mental and psychological sides.
He tried to find a kind of balance between the means of persuasion and means of
influence. He made convincing help infuencing. He diffentiated between kinds of proofs,
the made proofs and the non made proofs. The other ones were the base of the rhetoric
structure for Aristotle. The argumentative linguistic text is different from other texts that it
builds an interactive structure based on some means that aim to persuade and affect the
recipient.
In this research I'm going to expose Averroes maturity conception of legal movement to occur in the world and among the assets ; as long as the assets are composed of material and form , the movement depends on the union between material and form unt
il you get to the process of trans formation of the power in herent in the material by the action in the form .
And here comes the role of the actor which moves the material toward the union with form through movement , so the movement also serves as a process of the dialectic between the material and form that consist the nature of the assets in the world , and thus show the the movement it is bringing out of material to the form by the dialectic of power and action by becoming kinetic between assets
Thus , the conception of movement to Averroes highlights the important of form power and act as essential elements for the occurrence in existence . He stressed the vole of each element in the movement as well as the movement needs an actor and moving thing which are (material ,form, actor).
This research deals with the most important political ideas that Averroes dealt with through his summarization of the Aristotle's book Rhetoric, in contrast to Avicenna and Al-Farabi's logical approach to this book. We will not go through the logical
ideas in Rhetoric but rather focus on the Aristotelian political and philosophical issues which Averroes depends on in his summary of the book. It is an attempt to focus on Averroes's political ideas which preceded his summarization of Plato 's The Republic due to the fact that he didn't obtain the Arabic translation of Aristotle's book Politics.
We try in this research to focus on Averroes's way of summary regarding commitment to the Aristotelian text and its literal denotations on some occasions, or the interpretive reading on other occasions. In addition, it will focus on Averroes's reliance on his predecessors' explanations of the same book to clarify some statements, and then his attempt to apply some Aristotelian political ideas on the Arab-Muslim political reality in the Middle Ages.
The paper Sheds light on one of the most important problems among the whole problems
that we find in the history of philosophy, namely, the problem of the relationship between wisdom
and Sharia law, trying to disclose the nature of the relationship
between wisdom and law in order to
detect intellectual conflicts or issues that the philosophers tried to detect the pivotal and key points
between wisdom and Sharia law, and philosophy and religion, through the general cultural state
prevailing in the Arab society during the Islamic middle ages. In addition, we will try to clarify the
theoretical and methodological foundations of the problem of reconciling and highlight the
ideological goals that drove the philosophers to reconcile between wisdom and Sharia.
This research attempts to shed light on the issue of growing or uncontrolled
population growth, especially from the point of view of Robert Maltus as one of the
inhabitants who left their silence in this area. This study also addresses several key
aspects:
First, the reasons behind population growth such as migration, low mortality due to
improved health care, attention to women's reproductive health and availability of
medication. Second: the relationship between both the population increase and the food
problem, from the point of view of Maltos, who believes that there is a direct relationship
between the two variables, the more the population has worsened the problem of food.
Thirdly, reference is made to the main effects that unbalanced population growth may have
on the environment on the one hand, such as continued logging, population expansion, the
need for fresh drinking water, pollution of air, water, soil, and the inability to absorb waste.
On the social side, poverty, unemployment and the low social level, . The most prominent
solutions presented by Maltos to solve the population problem include ethical barriers and
natural contraindications. Fifth: To review some attitudes on the population issue such as
the theory of Thomas Sadler, James Stewart, Herbert Spencer, Karl Marx, and to indicate
the extent of intersection or difference with the theory of Maltos.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
