This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

1. Mafhūm al-Tarbiyah al-Islāmīyah -- 2. Mfhm uṣūl al-Tarbiyah al-Islāmīyah -- 3. Mafhūm al-naẓarīyah al-Tarbawīyah al-Islāmīyah -- 4. Mafhūm al-naẓarīyah al-Tarbawīyah al-Islāmīyah -- 5. Mafhūm al-Fikr al-tarbawī al-Islāmī Mafhūm al-Turāth al-tarbawī al-Islāmī -- 6. Mafhūm Falsafat al-Tarbiyah al-Islāmīyah.

This chapter contains sections titled: Generic Argument for Traditional Utilitarianism Mill's Proof of Utilitarianism (Straightforward Interpretation) Mill's Proof of Utilitarianism (One Alternative Interpretation) Mill's Proof of Utilitarianism (Another Alternative Interpretation).

On the controversial questions between al-Rāzī and al-Ṭūsī, Islamic philosophy; Islamic history to 1800; dissertation.

Encyclopedic dictionary of Yogasūtra of Patañjali.

On mind and body relationship; with reference to India.

Ibn Khaldūn, 1332-1406; criticism and interpretation; Arab civilization; islamic civilization; intellectuals and intellectual life.

For many commentators, Confucian ethics is a kind of virtue ethics. However, there is enough textual evidence to suggest that it can be interpreted as an ethics based on rules, consequentialist as well as deontological. Against these views, I argue that Confucian ethics is based on the roles that make an agent the person he or she is. Further, I argue that in Confucianism the question of what it is that a person ought to do cannot be separated from the (...) question of what it is to be a person, and that the latter is answered in terms of the roles that arise from the network of social relationships in which a person stands. This does not mean that Confucian ethics is unlike anything found in Western philosophy. Indeed, I show that many Western thinkers have advanced a view of ethics similar to the Confucian ethics as I interpret it. (shrink)