[lit-ideas] Re: The 'Near-Eastern' influences on the Greek philosophy, sc...

  • From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 22:39:20 -0700 (PDT)

--- Robert Paul <Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Omar writes:
> 
> There are resonances of both Plato
> and Aristotle [in 'Avicenna']. Then you have
> Al-Ghazali (Alghazal) 
> and Ibn-Rushd (Averroes) whose work is primarily or
> largely philosophical - yes, Al-Ghazali was a
> theologian, but one deeply steeped in philosophy,
> which he did not always sufficiently credit - and
> who
> certainly have something to say to us today. 
> 
> The first Arab scholars to do philosophy in a
> recognizably Western sense were
> apparently Neoplatonists: they were later led to
> Aristotle via a study of Galen.
> Avicenna (a Persian) may have been one of the many
> thinkers of his time who
> attempted to bring about a 'reconciliation' of Plato
> and Aristotle. This was
> never a good idea, if you stop to think about it,
> but faced with two such
> formidable presences, it's not surprising that so
> many tried. 

Yes. An additional difficulty was that Plotinus'
Enneads was then believed to be a work of Aristotle -
they called it Aristotle's Theology. Thus, their
Aristotle was Platonized/Plotinized. Avicenna seems to
me to be more of a Platonist than Aristotelian.
Aristotelianism in philosophy seems to have come fully
into its own only with Averroes and his Commentaries.
But one reason that I find Ghazali and Rushd more
interesting than, for example, Al Farabi, is that the
Greek influence is less overt when they do their own
work.

O.K.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: