Does the Conception of Spirit of the Muteqaddimūn Period Theologians Have a Correspondence in Modern Science?

Kader 21 (1):270-300 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The nature of the human being in general and the existence and nature of the soul in particular has been discussed throughout the history of thought. As a knowing subject, man firstly tried to know himself. While making this questioning, he not only wondered about his phenomenal existence (body), but also about his spiritual identity, which he did not doubt was out there somewhere. This curiosity has created an ongoing scientific journey from anatomy to physiology, from science to philosophy, from medicine to sociology, from biology to neurobiology, from psychology to neuropsychology, from chemistry to neurochemistry. In the end, various human conceptions have been developed in accordance with the scientific and philosophical background of each civilization. The ancient tradition of thought, which is the common accumulation of humanity, has largely included man in a dualist definition. Along with modern science, many devices have been developed to study human beings physically. Numerous data have been reached with the opportunities provided by technology, and these data have provided great usefulness in understanding what aspects a human being has in terms of physics and metaphysics. However, with the increase in our knowledge of the natural world and human, which is a part of it, the perspectives of the period were forced into paradigmatic changes. The philosophical movements that developed and changed in parallel with scientific knowledge, the decline of religion, especially in the Western world, regressed the dominant models in the interpretation of knowledge. Notions of human have inevitably taken their share from this great change. Is the subject behind the actions separate/independent from the body/brain and completely autonomous and rational? Or is it just the body/brain or its functionality, as modern neuroscience suggests? Does this coherent functionality arise entirely or in part from natural causation? Is there an essence or a distinctive feature that makes us human? If so, is this essence/property physical or is it a metaphysical substance? What answers did the early theologians give to these questions? What are the points of overlap between the hypotheses developed mainly on religious knowledge, partly on medical knowledge of the period via largely logical reasoning, and the definitions of human and soul revealed by contemporary experimental science? This line forms the main frame of the article. In summary, this study; It aims to identify the parallels and similarities of approach between the spiritual theories of the early theologians and current scientific data, which we see as two important phases of the ongoing ancient investigation. It is thought that the theories developed in this first period, when the transformation due to the acculturation process is not sufficiently determinative on thought, are more original and valuable. After giving brief information about the definitions of soul, mind, self and consciousness, which are among the basic concepts of the problem, the thoughts of early Mu‘tazilī and Ahl al-Sunnah thinkers on the subject are presented comparatively with current scientific data. We tried to make a healthy descriptive inference by making analytical and semantic arguments on the data obtained during the research.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,503

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Kelam Kozmolojik Argüman ve Modern Bilim.Onur Kenan Aydoğdu & Enis Doko - 2022 - In Mehmet Bulgen & Enis Doko (eds.), Din ve Bilim Açısından Yaratılış. İstanbul, Türkiye: pp. 327-342.
Kurgu veya Olgu Oluş Bağlamında Benlik Sorunu.Funda Neslioglu Serin & E. Funda Neslioğlu Serin - 2022 - Kaygı Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen -Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi 21 (1):354-373.
Locke ve Hume'un Kişisel Özdeşlik Anlayışları Bağlamında Benlik, Bellek ve Bilinç.Eren Rızvanoğlu - 2020 - Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy 10 (10:3):957-975.
Tarih, Bilim ve Bilinç.D. Özlem - 1999 - Felsefe Tartismalari 25:9-22.
Ben Neyim?Şahabettin Yalçin - 2011 - Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):27-38.
Hume ve Benlik.Şahabettin Yalçın - 2004 - Felsefe Tartismalari 32:19-31.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-09-25

Downloads
15 (#939,247)

6 months
11 (#230,695)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (October):435-50.
Ironic processes of mental control.Daniel M. Wegner - 1994 - Psychological Review 101 (1):34-52.
Consciousness: The remembered present.Gerald M. Edelman - 2001 - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 929:111-122.
Evolution, Epiphenomenalism, Reductionism.Alvin Plantinga - 2004 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (3):602-619.

View all 9 references / Add more references