On The Margins

Thursday December 16, 2004

[ Philosophy ] Incoherence from Baghdad to Cordoba

In a couple of previous notes and comments, I have stated that modern science, despite its glory, is incapable of answering the following, very basic question: Why is there anything at all when there can be absolutely nothing?

Goeff Arnold, in one of his comments on my note, takes issue with (a revised and different version) of my question in this way:

As for "Why is there anything rather than nothing?", I think that the positivists had this right: the question is incoherent.

That is a very interesting way for "positivists" to dismiss a very basic but important question.

Nevertheless, I do not want to harp on that any more right now. I have tasted of the positivist works long enough to know of their methods and limitations, and it would be an easy matter to demolish this particular approach to the basic question I've raised. Rather, I want to turn my attention to something else.

Geoff's use of the word "incoherent" reminds me of a bit of history I cannot help but recite.

Right about the time Europe was in the middle of its dark ages, that's about a thousand years before a Russell or a Popper came into existence, two Muslim scholars, one in Baghdad and one in Cordoba were debating the relevance of analytical philosophy in much the same way as we are today.

The first scholar was Ghazali, and the second, non other than Ibn Rushd. Both of them made great contributions to the scholarly debate of the time. (This is way more than Geoff and I can expect or hope for, I think, but we will continue to try.)

Abu-Hamid Muhammad Al-Ghazali (450-505 A.H., 1058-1111 A.D.), Dean and Law Professor at Baghdad University, wrote a book called the "The Incoherence of the Philosophers." (For an analysis from Sweden, see Manzoor, where a reference is made to how modern scholars of Maimonides' theosophy have traced his ideas to those of Al-Gazzali's.)

Some have noted that Al-Ghazali's main object of analysis and critique was the philosophical work by Abu Ali Sina (Avicenna, 980-1037). I've only briefly looked at Al-Ghazali's book, and don't remember reading anything on Abu Ali in it.

Of course, Abu'l Walid Muhammad Ibn Rush Al-Qurtubi (Averroes, 1126-1198), wrote back, in response to Al-Ghazali, from Cordoba in a thicker book called the Incoherence of the Incoherence. Al-Gazali had just passed away and could not produce a response but the path chosen by Ibn-Arabi, Ibn-Rushd's most brilliant student, should tell us something. (By the way, I remember reading some place that Ayatullah Ruhullah Khomeini wrote his dissertaion on Ibn Arabi.)

All of these philosophers, even as they write about the incoherence of each others' works, do indeed concern themselves with questions of existence albeit from opposing and very distinct perspectives. Unfortunately, most universities in the U.S. have no programs or scholars teaching and doing research in their works. I first ran to many of their works while taking breaks from my courses in mathematical logic and analytical philosophy to meander through U.C. Berkeley libraries.

On the other hand, I hear they still teach courses on all these philosophers in Qom and Najaf, not to mention Cairo and some other Western universities.

2004-12-16 22:15:00.0 -- Comments [2] ; Permalink ; Trackback.