Taşköprizade'nin el-Mealiminde Bilginin Tanımı Problemi (original) (raw)

Hatîbzâde’nin el-Mevâkıf’ta Tercih Edilen Bilgi Tanımına Yönelik Eleştirileri

2021

One of the most important issues of Islamic thought is knowledge. Islamic philosophers and theologians tried to define knowledge in the historical process and spoke out many definitions in this respect. ‘Adud al-Dīn al-Ījī (d. 756/1355), in his al-Mawâkif deals with some of these definitions in his and he preferred one of them and criticized the others. Sayyid Şherīf al-Jurjānī (d. 816/1413) explained the definition of al-Ījī as a commentator, although he did not agree with Ici. One of the important names of Ottoman thought Khatībzāde Muhy al-dīn Mehmed (d. 901/1496) criticized both the definition of al-Ījī and the statements made by al-Jurjānī about this definition in his treatise, which became famous with the name of Risāle fī ta‘rīfi'l-‘ilm. These criticisms are mostly realized within the terms of classical definition theory. In addition, while criticizing both Ici and Curcâni, Khatībzāde also takes into account the views they defended in their other works. During the article...

Taşköprülüzâde Ahmed Efendi̇’De İli̇mler Tasni̇fi̇

Çukurova Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi (ÇÜİFD)

İlimler tasnifi, düşünce tarihinde önemli bir yere sahiptir. Bu durumun temel nedenlerinden birisi ilimler hakkındaki sınıflandırmanın eğitim ve öğretim faaliyetlerinin düzenlenmesinde etkili olmasıdır. Düşünür ve ilim adamlarının ilimleri tasnif etmesinin arkasında yatan bir başka neden insanların varlık ve bilgi alanlarını daha bütüncül bir şekilde görme ve anlama istediğidir. Bir düşünürün paradigmasını yaptığı ilimler tasnifine bakarak anlamak mümkündür. Çalışmamızda ilimler sınıflandırmasında önemli bir yere sahip olan Taşköprülüzâde Ahmed Efendi'nin ilimler tasnifini ortaya koymaya çalışacağız. Bu bağlamda ilimlerin

Mutezile Kelâmında Düşünce (Nazar)-Bilgi ilişkisi

AÜİFD, 51:1 (2010), ss.151-176, 2010

Makale, Kadı Abdulcebbar'ın düşünce-bilgi ilişkisi konusundaki yaklaşımını ele almaktadır. Bu çerçevede konu, düşünce ile bilginin 'tevlid' teorisi içerisinde nasıl ele alındığı tartışılmaktadır. Makale, bunun yanı sıra Kadı Abdulcebbar'ın nazaı; delil. medlıil. ta 'alluk, ma 'nd, /ıd/, sukıinu'n-nefs ve nikdd gibi epistemolojik kavramları birbiriyle ilişkisi açısından tartışmakta ve Kadı Abdulcebbar'ın, bilginin tanımı ve mahiyeti sonınıınu bu "kavramsal ağ" içerisinde nasıl aşmaya çalıştığı irdelenmektedir.

Atebetü'l- Hakâyık'ın Tanıklığında Bilgi Metaforları

Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Dergisi/Journal of World Turkic Researchers, 2016

Bu çalışmada Hakaniye Türkçesi döneminin dinî-didaktik eseri Atebetü'l Hakâyık'ta Edib Ahmed'in yazdıklarından hareketle bilgi kavramı ele alınacaktır. Bu kavramların nasıl metaforlaştığı anlambilim yöntemleriyle açıklanacaktır.

Eleştirinin Eleştirisi: Bilgi Tanımı Bağlamında Hüsâm Çelebi’nin Hatibzâde Tenkidi

Eskiyeni, 2022

Since the early period of Islamic thought, studies on the subject of existence, knowledge, and value have been made by theologians. While some theology-philosophy books started with the subject of existence, some of them started with the subject of knowledge. It is known that knowledge is closely related to faith. Due to this close contact, theologians have built their philosophy of knowledge around titles such as the definition, limits, sources and possibilities of knowledge. Rather than discussing faith, which has a predominant subjective aspect, the field of knowledge, which is a more objective field, has been highlighted. Thanks to the transfer of faith to the knowledge field, people were able to conduct their discussions on rational grounds. It is foreseen that the issue will be inconclusive when faith is discussed alone. Every person is free to believe anything, regardless of right or wrong, but the same freedom does not exist in the field of knowledge. Knowledge has an objective and controllable structure. Therefore anyone who is trying to convey his or his/her belief to others should definitely explain his/her belief on a rational basis. Belief should be brought closer to knowledge in order to spread the sharing of faith. Belief cannot be examined, but knowledge cannot be ruled out. The close relationship of knowledge with belief should not be overlooked. On account of this for theologians faith and belief consist of affirmation. So what is knowledge, what does it mean to know? Is knowing the same as believing? Is the person who says he knows something different from the person who says he believes something? All these questions seem to necessitate the definition of knowledge as well as belief. The definition of knowledge changes according to schools and scholars in Islamic thought. Some scholars claim that absolute knowledge cannot be defined by counting its self-evident (badīhī). However, according to the great majority, knowledge is theoretical and therefore its definition can be made. In the history of kalām, many definitions of knowledge have been made and criticized. In the article, the definition of knowledge as “an adjective that obliges to differentiate” will be investigated. According to this definition, another important feature of knowledge is that differentiation is not likely to contradict. In the final analysis, the category of knowledge is an adjective. Through the agency of this adjective, the subject knows. Knowledge is a separate activity. For something known to be knowledge, it must be certain and not otherwise likely. An imprecise comprehension is not considered knowledge according to theologians. This kind of knowledge definition, which was presented perfectly in the theological books of the late period, was criticized by Khaṭībzāde (d. 901/1496) from ten aspects. Ḥusām Çelebi (d. 926/1520), on the other hand, found all ten criticisms of Khaṭībzāde weak in different aspects. Çelebi found all ten criticisms of Khaṭībzāde weak in different aspects. In the article, first Khaṭībzāde’s criticisms will be explained in order, then Çelebi’s counter-criticism will be examined and strengths and weaknesses in the statements of both will be pointed out.