Document Type : The Quarterly Jornal
Author
PhD, Imami Theology, Faculty of Islamic Studies, University of Quran and Hadith, Qom, Iran.
10.22081/jpt.2024.69545.2142
Abstract
The subject of this research is to examine and critique Ibn Taymiyyah's view on the proof of beliefs based on reason. This has been done by identifying his perspective on rational methods in his written works, and this research, using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to answer the question of how Ibn Taymiyyah's view on the methods of proving rational beliefs was and what criticisms are made of it.
He opposes restricting rational reasoning to analogy, similitude, and induction, and has only briefly defined the inductive method, but has discussed the method of analogy and similitude in detail, and denies the function of logical analogy or universal analogy, as he calls it, and on the contrary, accepts the authority of similitude and analogy of the absent to the witnessed, and attempts to make most experts accept the authority of similitude.
In the critique, what he calls the method of rational reasoning other than analogy, similitude, and induction, in fact, goes back to one of these three methods, and the denial of the function of analogy is also not valid. Similitude, although it is one of the methods of rational proof, is not a definite proof.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)