1. What is the place of reason in the search for the truth for al-Ghazali?
Al-Ghazali makes his focus on truth explicit from the beginning—he writes that everyone should “allow truth to lead [them]” (59). He is determined to uncover the truth by “penetrat[ing] every obscurity, grapp[ling] with every problem, tackl[ing] every predicament, [and] examin[ing] the beliefs of every faction” (60); a key part of this process is questioning “inherited” (60) and “instilled” (61) beliefs. Although Al-Ghazali calls many elements of science and philosophy blasphemous, he seems to employ a proto-scientific method in his investigations, as he writes that “what is secure from error should be...closely associated with certainty” (61). Al-Ghazali also postulates that “for [ideas] could only be rebutted with a proof, and a proof” (63); both statements indicates a value of evidence and reason, rather than blind trust in “conformist beliefs” (61).
As al-Ghazali investigates the different factions that seekers of knowledge comprise, he analyzes each faction’s beliefs using reason and logic—he is so dedicated to his quest for truth that he believes that one must “reach...the utmost limits of [a] science” (66) in order to fully understand a topic. As he debunks the beliefs of different factions, he never strays from the use of reason and logic; in fact, his way of dissecting topics in order to make the fallacy he wants to point out clear is similar to Socrates’ dialectic strategy.
The value al-Ghazali places on reason becomes especially clear when he criticizes those who eschew all ideas that are related to philosophy under the pretext of defending religion. Denying the sciences is “a great offense against Islam” (70), he argues, as doing so misrepresents the faith as ignorant. Al-Ghazali’s ability to analyze a topic critically and not reject it outright because it is associated with blasphemy reveals the central role of reason in his analytical methods.
Al-Ghazali dichotomizes philosophy and empirical sciences (arithmetic, astronomy, geometry, etc.). Rather, than use one to disprove the other or vice versa, he describes mathematics as "demonstrative matters that one cannot deny once one has understood them and become cognizant of them," (68). He explains that a strict believer of Islam who denies sciences just because it doesn't coincide with the religion causes conflict that is unnecessary since, "There is nothing in the religious law that either negates or affirms these sciences, nor is there anything in these sciences that concern religious matters," (70). For millennia people have declared the controversy between the truth of science or religion, however, Al-Ghazali inserts a modern notion of their independent coexistence. This not only allows the flourishing of scientific progress but an underlying, and historical continuation of faith and traditional philosophical practice.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteReason is a prominent notion in al-Ghazali’s theory, yet it is also is central to a paradoxical interpretation of the aforementioned work. When faith is leveraged against reason, it becomes impossible to reach a conclusion without comprising one of these two principles. The essence of certain facets of faith is lost when subject to empirical scrutinization, while faith induces a bias therefore tainting the purity of science. As one approaches the boundary between our world and that of faith, it appears that only ones internal judgement can decide the equilibrium between the scientific notions and the ideals of faith.
Throughout his work, al-Ghazali investigates the natural biases that affect people's beliefs. For example, he points out that a rational person "examines the statement itself. If it is true, he accepts it regardless of whether the person who made the statement is a liar or an honest person," while many, such as those who criticize philosophers for the sake of Islam, are largely influenced by who made the statement. He also points out that "Every child is born in the natural state; his parents make him a Jew, Christian, or Magian." More generally, this means that one's surroundings inevitably give a person bias. Through explaining why the views of others are irrational, al-Ghazali furthers his own argument about what the correct form of belief is. But his approach does more- it investigates the reasons humans have for forming their beliefs, and points out that these reasons are often not valid. It may be beneficial to apply al-Ghazali's method not only to what others tell us, but also to our own beliefs, in order to see if we are guilty of any of these biases.
ReplyDelete