File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0311, message 335


From: "John Foster" <borealis-AT-mercuryspeed.com>
Subject: Re: Islam Birth Date
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:34:16 -0800



----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Crifasi" <crifasi-AT-hotmail.com>
To: <heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 6:03 AM
Subject: Re: Islam Birth Date


> John Foster wrote:
>
> >You must be going the wrong way in time. Both Mohammed, and Avicenna,
lived
> >long after the the presocratics, Aristotles, etc. Islam started in the
7th
> >Century, 1300 years BP.
>
> John what on earth does this have anything to do with what I said? I
> originally said that the west has more roots in common with Iraq than with
> Japan, and democracy worked in Japan.

If you mean the Japan since the treaties of Perry (1853), then I have to
disagree with you on that. Japan since the treaties of Perry, when the US
opened up trade with Japan, has 'changed' immensely from the fuedal, farming
society it was for thousands of years. Japan adopted significant changes
such as 'a new system of law (1881) based on French jurispurdence
(Napolenonic Code). Civil rights guaranteeing freedom of speech, press, and
security from arrest, and punishment except under due process were also
established. The 'eta' classes were freed from bondage of slavery, and
discrimination. The industrial revolution only lasted 50 years in Japan, and
there is very few traces of any feudal or 'backward' civil functions now.

Democracy has never been allowed to flourish in Iraq this century. It had a
good start after the country became independent and nationalized it's oil
industry.


> Rene responded that those are mere
> political ties, not deeper philosophical ones. I responded that the west
> indeed has philosophical roots in common with Islam, and pointed to the
fact
> that the west received Greek philosophy through the Islamics. Rene then
said
> that this was merely a "traffic" rerouting issue, at which point my jaw
hit
> the ground from seeing such a shockingly sophomoric generalization come
from
> a scholar. Anyone who knows the slightest thing about the Islamics between
> 850 AD and 1150 AD knows that the Greek influence was infinitely more than
a
> mere "traffic" reroute.
>
> Now, how do the facts you cite above affect what I said in the slightest?
>
> Anthony Crifasi
>
Macolm is correct. During the medieval period primary sources on Atristotle
was in the form of 'commentaries' as there were very few Greek works
available. Plato was virtually unknown. This led to some 'errors' in
attribution. Islamic philosophy beginning with Avicenna was influenced by
the Aristotle. It is interesting to note that Heideggers' 'dissertation' was
on Duns Scotus' entitled "Doctrine of Categories and Meaning". Included in
that was his interest in the "influence of Aristotle on Scholasticism." Duns
Scotus may have had only 'commentaries on Aristotle' and relied on Augustine
and Thomas for those commentaries.

"The Arabian philosophy was one of the principle channels whereby the
complete Aristotle was introduced to the West". [A History of Philosophy,
vol. 2, Medieval Philosophy, part 1. Frederick Copleston, S. J.]

It is interesting that Dante placed both Avicenna and Averroes (I think) in
Limbo. They were not quite in Purgatorio and neither where the philosophers
place in Heaven because although believed in God, they were not Christians.

1.    Christian Syrians first translated Aristotle into Syriac;

2.    Syriac translations were translated into Arabic;

3.    The commentaries of Averroes (the commentator par excellence0 were
translated into Latin; and

4.    Thomas and other Christian philosophers - a school of philosophers in
Paris - represented an integral Aristotleanism who though themselves to
'genuine' Aristotleans.

The later were not 'genuine' Aristotleans because they were not able to
separate genuine Aristotlean philosophy from the commentarie of Averroes....

"When portions of the writings of Avicenna were translated into Latin in the
12  th century, the Christian world found itself faced for the first time
with a closely knit system which was bound to exercise a strong attraction
on certain minds....Before the entire Metaphysics of Aristotle became
available, uncertainty reigned as to which doctrines were to be attributed
to Avicenna and which to Aristotle.  Thus Roger Bacon thought that Avicenna
must have followed Aristotle throughout, though he (Bacon) had not got books
M and N of the Metaphysics and so could not check the truth or untruth of
this supposition."  [A History of Philosophy, vol. 2, Medieval Philosophy,
part 1. Frederick Copleston, S. J.]

In fact it was not until about the 14 th century or later, the 15 th century
that all the works of Aristotle became available via the searches of the
Medici family, Savonarola, et cetera., between 1453 and 1517 AD. [The World
of Humanism: 1453-1517. Myron Gilmore].



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005