Publication: Kutbüddin er-Râzî’de Tasdik Kavramı ve Felsefî İçeriği
Loading...
Files
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Makalede Kutbüddin er-Râzî’nin er-Risâletü’l-ma‘mûle fi’t-tasavvur ve’t-tasdîkisimli risalesindeki temel iddiası tahlil edilmektedir. Bu amaçla önce risalenin içeriği özetlenmekte, ardından Râzî’nin tasdike ilişkin görüşünün bilgi teorisi ve mantık açısından bazı sonuçlarına işaret edilmektedir. Kutbüddin er-Râzî risalede konuyu, yüklemi, zihnin bu ikisi arasında kurduğu nispet anlamında hükmü, zihnin nispeti kurmasıyla birlikte konu ve yüklemin birbiriyle bağlantılı hale gelmesi anlamında intisabı ve önermenin kendisini tasavvur kategorisine dahil etmekte, tasdikin sadece hükmün nefsu’l-emre mutabık olduğuna kanaat getirme anlamında iz‘ân yahut kabûl olduğunu iddia etmektedir. Makalenin temel iddiası şudur: Kutbüddin er-Râzî’nin tasdik açıklamasına göre her ne kadar biz bilgiyi tasavvur ve tasdik olmak üzere iki kısma ayırsak da sadece tasavvur seviyesinde kalan ve mutabakat inancının eşlik etmediği inançlar tanımı bakımından bilgi olsa bile gerçekte bilen bir öznenin bilgisi sayılmaya elverişli değildir. Çünkü bu durumda insanî özne, sadece bir taşıyıcıya dönüşmekte ve taşıdığı şeyin bilişsel içeriğini fark etse de bilgisel değerine dair herhangi bir kanaate sahip olmamaktadır.
This article discusses the nature of assent in Quṭb al-Dīn al-Rāzī and tries to analyze al-Rāzī’s main arguments about the nature of conception and assent in his al-Risāla al-ma‘mūla fī al-taṣawwur wa-l-taṣdīq. For this purpose, firstly the content of the treatise is summarized, and then some of the results of al-Rāzī’s view of assent in terms of theory of knowledge and logic are pointed out. In this treatise Quṭb al-Dīn al-Rāzī considers basic concepts such as: the subject, the predicate, the judgment in the sense that the mind establishes the relation between the two, the states of being in relation (intisāb) in the sense that the subject and predicate become connected with each other and the proposition itself in the category of conception. He asserts that the assent consists of only idh‘ān and qabūl in the sense of the conviction that the judgment is in correspondence with nafs al-amr. The main claim of the article is this: According to Quṭb al-Dīn al-Rāzī ‘s explanation of assent, although we divide knowledge into conception and assent, the beliefs which remain at the level of the conception and are not accompanied by the second belief about correspondence, cannot be considered as knowledge of a subject who knows, even if there is knowledge in terms of definition. Because, in this case, the human subject becomes only a carrier and does not have any conception about the epistemological value of what is carried, even though he or she recognizes the cognitive content of what it carries.
This article discusses the nature of assent in Quṭb al-Dīn al-Rāzī and tries to analyze al-Rāzī’s main arguments about the nature of conception and assent in his al-Risāla al-ma‘mūla fī al-taṣawwur wa-l-taṣdīq. For this purpose, firstly the content of the treatise is summarized, and then some of the results of al-Rāzī’s view of assent in terms of theory of knowledge and logic are pointed out. In this treatise Quṭb al-Dīn al-Rāzī considers basic concepts such as: the subject, the predicate, the judgment in the sense that the mind establishes the relation between the two, the states of being in relation (intisāb) in the sense that the subject and predicate become connected with each other and the proposition itself in the category of conception. He asserts that the assent consists of only idh‘ān and qabūl in the sense of the conviction that the judgment is in correspondence with nafs al-amr. The main claim of the article is this: According to Quṭb al-Dīn al-Rāzī ‘s explanation of assent, although we divide knowledge into conception and assent, the beliefs which remain at the level of the conception and are not accompanied by the second belief about correspondence, cannot be considered as knowledge of a subject who knows, even if there is knowledge in terms of definition. Because, in this case, the human subject becomes only a carrier and does not have any conception about the epistemological value of what is carried, even though he or she recognizes the cognitive content of what it carries.
