نوع مقاله : علمی ـ پژوهشی
نویسنده
دکتری کلام امامیه، دانشکده علوم و معارف اسلامی دانشگاه قرآن و حدیث قم، قم، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Ibn Taymiyya is a prominent figure in the history of Islamic beliefs, and his influence on certain excommunicationist factions today is undeniable. This research examines and critiques Ibn Taymiyya’s views on proving religious beliefs based on reason, by analyzing his perspectives on rational methodologies as reflected in his written works. Using a descriptive-analytic approach, this study aims to address the following question: How did Ibn Taymiyya perceive rational proof methods for religious beliefs, and what criticisms can be made of his views? Ibn Taymiyya rejects limiting rational arguments to syllogism, analogy, and induction. While he only briefly defines induction, he extensively discusses syllogism and analogy. He denies the validity of logical, or as he terms it, inclusive syllogism, and instead advocates for the legitimacy of analogy and the "syllogism of the absent for the present." He also attempts to align scholars with his acceptance of analogical reasoning. Critically, it should be noted that what Ibn Taymiyya presents as a distinct method of rational argument ultimately refers back to one of these three methods. His rejection of syllogism is poorly founded, as it overlooks its established logical validity. Moreover, while analogy is indeed a method of rational proof, it does not provide certainty. Contrary to Ibn Taymiyya’s assertions, many scholars had already recognized analogy's inherent inability to yield certainty.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)