Philosophical Bedrock of Farabi’s Theory of Diversity

Mantık Araştırmaları Dergisi Journal of Logical Studies Philosophical Bedrock of Farabi’s Theory of Diversity Yazar(lar) | Author(s): Nadia MAFTOUNİ Bu makaleyi kaynak gösterin | Cite this article: Maftouni̇, N. "Philosophical Bedrock of Farabi’s Theory of Diversity". Mantık Araştırmaları Dergisi 2 (2020): 40-49 Bu makaleye çevrimiçi ulaşın | See this article online: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/mader/issue/59321/765277 ISSN 2687-3125 | e-ISSN 2687-3125 Mantık Araştırmaları Dergisi Yıl:2 Sayı: 3-4 2020 / Bahar-Kış Philosophical Bedrock of Farabi’s Theory of Diversity Nadia MAFTOUNİ* Abstract Diversity includes three main approaches. While exclusivist approaches contend that merely one religion is true, pluralistic views hold that all religions are as good as each other. The third approaches, namely, inclusivist ones claim that although just one religion is absolutely true, other religions to some extent enjoy value. Farabi’s theory of religious diversity contains aspects of exclusivist approaches without depriving of the advantages of inclusivist theories. Naming it relativity vis-àvis rationality, I am trying to sort of account for Farabi’s theory of religious diversity. For him, people come to grasp rational truths and knowledge mostly through the use of their imagination. Furthermore, the arousal of people’s feelings and emotions often originates in their imagination via sensory images and imagery forms. However, the ultimate utopian objective is to drive the public to gain rational pleasure. Given that the public, based on their nature and general habits, in most part, are unable to perceive rational truths and knowledge, the path to rational pleasure must be represented via their imagination. So bringing rational pleasure to people's minds through their imagination, the various religions in each society should represent rational truths and knowledge through the sensory images and imagery forms familiar to that society. ••• Assoc. Prof., University of Tehran, Department of Philosophy and Islamic Kalam * Geliş Tarihi: 06-07-2019 Kabul Tarihi: 24-09-2019 Yayın Tarihi 31-12-2020 Keywords: Farabi, rationality, relativity, relativism, sensory images, imagery forms. ARAŞTIRMA MAALESİ Farabian theory of religious diversity shares aspects of relativity as well as rationality. For Farabi, rational truth and rational pleasure is fixed and one, having only one denotation, while its connotations, say, sensory images and imagery forms are various and sundry. That being the case, different communities can have different ways to perceive the same truth and knowledge, working toward the same goal. Philosophical Bedrock of Farabi’s Theory of Diversity Introduction There are a few methods to classify different notions of religious diversity, in one of which common approaches to religious diversity include three major categories. These introductory words are meant to provide a quick overview of these three main approaches, setting the stage for voicing some concerns over Farabi’s theory of religious diversity. Following threefold division including exclusivist, inclusivist, and pluralist is introduced by Alan Race.1 1. Exclusivist approaches espouse that merely one religion is true. 2. Pluralistic views maintain that all religions are as good as each other. 3. Inclusivist approaches assert that although just one religion is absolutely true, other religions also enjoy some value. In which of three approaches included Farabi’s theory of religious diversity? The cornerstone of Farabi’s theory is based upon replying the following question: Do we have to pick one option out of two possible notions: rationality against relativity, or vice versa? Or there is not a great deal of difference between them? Rationality, relativity, and relativism could be regarded the subject of continuing debates in social sciences and humanities.2 It should be 1 1983 See, to name a few: Geertz, Clifford, Available Light: Anthropological Reflections on Philosophical Topics, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2000. Hollis Martin, Steven Lukes, Rationality and Relativism, Cambridge, MIT Press, 1982. Krausz, Michael, "Art and Its Mythologies: A Relativist View". In: Margolis J., Krausz M., Burian R.M. (eds.) Rationality, Relativism and the Human Sciences. Studies of the Greater Philadelphia Philosophy Consortium, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht, 1986. Margolis, Joseph, Krausz, A.S., Burian, R. (Eds.), Rationality, Relativism and the Human Sciences, Springer, Dordrecht , 1986. Jarvie, I. C. “Rationality and Relativism.” The British Journal of Sociology, vol. 34, no. 1, 1983, pp. 44–60. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/590608. Nielsen, Kai, “Rationality and Relativism ”, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, vol. 4, Issue 4, pp. 313 - 331 First Published December 1, 1974, https://doi.org/10.1177/004839317400400309. 2 41 Nadia MAFTOUNİ mentioned that some contemporary researchers try to draw a distinction between relativity and relativism: I draw from classical sociological theory and make a crucial distinction between relativity and relativism. That is, I acknowledge that relativity is indeed a fact of life. Not all meaning is transparent, nor are all ideological-practical positions shared by all cultures or by all individuals within a given culture — despite the strain of hegemonic structures to exact consensus. But such relativity, I hold, refers to the level of social life I call the presented. This level, however, does not exhaust all of social life, though it is its most conspicuous side. There is another level in social life which I call the given. This level has to do with more permanent and underlying social constructs both within societies as well as among societies. p. 2093 As an instance, art to a large extent may well be regarded as a matter of relativism.4 I have analyzed Farabi’s theory of art in my other writings, debating his notions on art as a matter of relativity vis-à-vis rationality. Anyway, Farabi’s theory of religious diversity could be discussed concerning the distinction of relativity and relativism, taking account of the stand of rationality in Farabi’s philosophy. While rationality clearly has a profound position in his philosophy, Farabi has sharp references to relativity, explaining of which will follow. Is there any contradiction in Farabi's words? How can we succeed to find consistency between rationality and relativity in Farabi's writings? We search the answer in Farabian theory of pluralism, explanation of which requires developing the concept of imagination. Simon, Lawrence H.. “Rationality and cultural relativism”, 1998, doi:10.4324/9780415249126-R024-1. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/rationality-andcultural-relativism/v-1. 3 Muñoz B. (1986) "On Relativity, Relativism, and Social Theory". In: Margolis J., Krausz M., Burian R.M. (eds.) Rationality, Relativism and the Human Sciences. Stu (...truncated)