User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
  Citation Number 1
 Views 40
 Downloands 9
Mu‘tezile’den İbn Sînâ’ya Gelen Unsurlar: İbn Sînâ’nın Aristoteles ve Fârâbî’ye Yönelik Metodolojik Eleştirisinde Mu‘tezilî Katkı
2020
Journal:  
İlahiyat Tetkikleri Dergisi
Author:  
Abstract:

Makalede, Mu‘tezile ile İbn Sînâ’nın sofist iddialara yaklaşım tarzları arasındaki etkileşim incelenmektedir. Aristoteles, Fârâbî, İbn Sînâ ve bazı Mu‘tezilî kelâmcıların sofistlere karşı tutumu karşılaştırmalı analiz ile ele alınmaktadır. İbn Sînâ sofistlerin iddialarına cevap verirken Aristoteles ve Fârâbî’nin izlediği yöntemden farklılaşmakta, onlara eleştiri yöneltmektedir. Makalenin varsayımı İbn Sînâ’nın Aristoteles ve Fârâbî eleştirisindeki tercihinin bazı Mu‘tezilî bilginlerin etkisinde şekillendiğidir. Bu noktada özellikle Ka‘bî’nin daha ön planda olduğu varsayılmaktadır. Makalede öncelikle İbn Sînâ’nın Aristoteles ve Fârâbî’den ayrıldığı ve her ikisine yönelik metodolojik eleştirisi tespit edilmiştir. Ardından İbn Sînâ’nın yöntemsel değişikliğinin arkasında Ka‘bî’nin etkisi ortaya konulmuştur. İbn Sînâ’nın sofist iddialara karşı ilkesel ve metodolojik tutumunda Aristo ve Fārābī’den ayrıştığı ve bu ayrışmada Ka‘bî’nin etkisini bir varsayım olarak ele alan makale, karşılaştırmalı ve içerik analizleri yardımıyla müsterşid ve tenbih gibi kavramsal ve içerik açısından İbn Sînâ’nın Ka‘bî’den etkilendiğini ortaya koymuştur. Makaledeki varsayımı temellendirmek, felsefe ve kelâm düşünce gelenekleri açısından oldukça özgün bir noktadır. Bu meyanda makalenin; konusu, varsayımları ve sonuçları açısından özgünlük taşıdığı, kelâm ve felsefe literatürüne katkı sağlayacak bir çalışma olması hedeflenmektedir.

Keywords:

In the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
2020
Author:  
Abstract:

In the article, the interaction between Mu'tezile and Ibn Sina's sophisticated claims is examined. The attitude of Aristotle, Farabi, Ibn Sina and some Mu'tezili speakers to the sofists is discussed by comparative analysis. In response to the claims of the sophisticists, Aristotle and Farabi are different from the method they follow, and they are criticized. The assumption of the article is that the preference of Ibn Sina in the criticism of Aristotle and Farabi was formed under the influence of some Muthesian scientists. In this case, it is assumed that Ka’bî is in the front. The article first identified the methodological criticism of Ibn Sina’s departure from Aristotle and Farabi and both of them. After that, there was a change in the form of the Qur’an, which was revealed. Ibn Sina’s principle and methodological attitude against the sophistic claims separated from Aristotle and Fārābī and the article that addressed the influence of Ka’bî as an assumption in this separation, comparative and content analysis, revealed that Ibn Sina’s conceptual and content aspects, such as Msterchid and Tenbih, were influenced by Ka’bî. Basing the assumption in the article is a very original point in terms of philosophy and vocal thinking traditions. In this context, it is intended to be a study that will contribute to literature and philosophy in which the article is original in terms of its subject, assumptions and results.

Keywords:

Elements From Mu‘tazilah To Avicenna: Mu‘tazilah’s Contribution In The Methodological Critique Of Avicenna Towards Aristotle and Al-fārābī
2020
Author:  
Abstract:

The article examines the interaction between Mu‘tazilah and Avicenna’s approaches to sophist claims. The attitude of Aristotle, al-Fārābī, Avicenna and some Mu‘tazilah scholars towards the sophists is addressed by comparative analysis. The article’s assumption is that Avicenna’s preference in Aristotle and al-Fārābī criticism was shaped by the influence of some Mu‘tazilah. It is assumed that al-Ka’bī, in particular, are more in the foreground. In this article, I will determine the point where Avicenna left Aristotle and al-Fārābī. Subsequently, the influence of al-Ka’bī was revealed behind the methodical change of Avicenna. I will base the assumption of the paper using comparative analysis. The article hypothesized that Avicenna differs from Aristotle and al-Fārābī in his principal and methodological attitude towards sophist claims and it assumed that al-Ka’bī has a role in this separation. With the help of comparative and content analysis, it has been concluded that Avicenna was influenced by al-Ka’bī in terms of concepts and content, such as mustarshid and al-tanbih. The basis of the assumption in the article is unique in terms of Philosophy and Kalam. Therefore, it is aimed to be an original study in terms of the subject, assumptions and results of the article and contribute to the literature of Kalam and Philosophy.

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Attention!
To view citations of publications, you must access Sobiad from a Member University Network. You can contact the Library and Documentation Department for our institution to become a member of Sobiad.
Off-Campus Access
If you are affiliated with a Sobiad Subscriber organization, you can use Login Panel for external access. You can easily sign up and log in with your corporate e-mail address.
Similar Articles












İlahiyat Tetkikleri Dergisi

Field :   İlahiyat

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 635
Cite : 1.597
İlahiyat Tetkikleri Dergisi