525: Avicenna

The more you study Islamic philosophers, the more you begin to wonder, on what are these philosophers spending their time and why?

I should not say this, of course, but with the knowledge we have today it was such a waste of time and energy in my opinion.

And yet such an judgmental observation doesn’t satisfy me really, for the questions those people were thinking about and were fighting each other for, still exist today to some extend.

If there is one question which has puzzled mankind from day one then it is the question “What to do with religion?” In our world there always have been believers and non believers.

The reason for this is simple. You pray to a god and bring sacrifices to him or her and ask for help. The result is nothing, nada. You come up with all kinds of explanations, 

while the non believer say “I told you, that it won’t gonna rain when you perform all kinds of rituals. You should look at the sky, the clouds, the direction of the wind”.

That is something Aristotle might have said, referring to the eternal relation between cause and effect. And here we touch on the quintessence of Islamic philosophy

and on the fact that around 1000 AD this Islamic philosophy was enthusiastically embraced by the Western scholastic thinkers of the Catholic Church.

What the scholastic philosophers and Arab philosophers had in common was the problem of reconciling reason (the ratio) with religion, which for some in our time is still an issue.

For us it isn’t such a hot issue anymore, but in those days it was the prime issue among philosophers. Why would that be? 

In the Islamic world around 1000 AD religion was the dominating ideology to keep society organized under a rather totalitarian system.

So, of course, it is allowed to say “you should look at the sky, the clouds, the direction of the wind”, but to keep your head in place you had to add, that god is the cause of everything.

Ibn Sina, better know to us as Avicenna (980 - 1037) was one of the greatest in integrating Aristotelian rationality and religion.

In him you meet a philosopher who has a very clear and detailed knowledge of god. He knows exactly what god is , his properties….name it.

And then I begin to wonder. How can he formulate all such details theories? I think, I found an answer. Actually it is quite obvious. Some people today do the same. You reason backward, from the end to the beginning.

Aristotle came up with the relation between essence and existence. The essence is the abstract concept in the mind, derived from the observation of a lot of existing entities.

So you reason backward. You see the individual entities, abstract from them their essence. Then wonder “How come, that I call all these entities humans?” and then conclude that this is because this knowledge of the essence is from the Intellectus Agens…..

According to Avicenna the essences existed in three ways. In the first way it exists before it is materialized in something, in Latin….”ante rem”. It is an immaterial archetype in the mind of god.

In the second way it exists in the material things itself….in Latin..”in rebus”. There the essence is as real as in the first way.

Finally the essence can exist in our mind as an abstraction form our observations…in Latin…”post rem”, where we see them in their pure form again. That is…in relation to their first way of being.

In Avicenna’s belief there necessarily had to be a mind in which the essences existed, before we could be able to know them.

Like in causality there necessarily HAD to be a first cause, which only could be the First Mover, god. You just look around and say: this can’t be coincidental.

And as you see, for centuries the human mind likes to use backward inference as a proof for what only causes more questions, I would say .

The Discussion

.

[13:20] herman Bergson: Thank you ^_^

[13:20] herman Bergson: .

[13:20] Gemma Allen: Aristotle and all sounds very logical ... of course

[13:20] Daruma BoaDaruma Boa claps

[13:20] Bejiita Imako: YAY! (yay!)

[13:20] herman Bergson: Well....Avicenna added  some Platonism to it.....

[13:20] Gemma Allen: Yes-ah!

[13:20] Gemma Allen: well

[13:20] herman Bergson: For Aristotle the essences were in fact only abstractions in the mind.....

[13:21] Genji Shikibu: wouldn't that ultimately make the mind itself...God?

[13:21] herman Bergson: But Avicenna and other Arab philosophers said that they had to be Ideas in the mind of god.....which is Plato's way of thinking

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: there have to be some supernatural being that everything originated from sort of?

[13:22] herman Bergson: What do you mean Genji?

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: being

[13:22] herman Bergson: Well Bejiita...that is the great intellectual mystery to me....

[13:22] Genji Shikibu: well, if god is abstract and can only be realized in the mind... then the mind must be first... and it creates the god

[13:22] herman Bergson: why comes the human mind to such a conclusion? :-)

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: cause that seems how they must have terrorized

[13:23] Gemma Allen: well most religions believe the mind is part of god so....

[13:23] herman Bergson: As long it is just the mind....

[13:23] Bejiita Imako: i just say they should study more physics ㋡

[13:23] Honey  Bee: excuse me , everything in the universe is natural

[13:23] Daruma Boa: well physics have also a lot mysteries

[13:23] Bejiita Imako: indeed

[13:24] Daruma Boa: which can not be explained

[13:24] herman Bergson: Honey, I would say...everything in the universe just IS.....

[13:24] Daruma Boa: i just read a book about it

[13:24] Honey  Bee: i dont see anything as supper natural

[13:24] Bejiita Imako: but i dont believe some big mind or being created all electrons protons and so

[13:24] Bejiita Imako: that builds the entire universe up

[13:24] Daruma Boa: we humans do not know so much as we want^^

[13:24] Bejiita Imako: including us

[13:24] Areyn Laurasia: we are here to see what's possible?

[13:24] Daruma Boa: the god or big mind is in us

[13:24] Daruma Boa: but humans are too stupid to fid´nd it^^

[13:25] Bejiita Imako: i d say something like that

[13:25] Daruma Boa: find #

[13:25] Honey  Bee: i don’t think we will ever know everything about our history of creation

[13:25] Gemma Allen: they keep trying tho daaruma

[13:25] herman Bergson: Voltaire had a nice idea about it all...Dieu Horloger

[13:25] Daruma Boa: oh gemma, very less is trying to find^^

[13:25] Daruma Boa: i am afraid

[13:25] herman Bergson: Some God created the whole thing and then left it ticking...:-)

[13:25] Daruma Boa: the most watches tv...

[13:25] Gemma Allen: well science is getting closer and closer to the beginnings

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: the closest to find god we are now i d say is the LCH machine t CERN that i popularly call the god machine

[13:26] Gemma Allen: with telescopes that reach out so far

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: LHC

[13:26] Gemma Allen: and the cern thing

[13:26] Gemma Allen: Yes-ah!

[13:26] herman Bergson: I dont agree Daruma...for that is begging the question......

[13:26] Daruma Boa: mh bejita i find this machine just a toy.

[13:26] Gemma Allen: oh i don’t

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: bu study the smallest bits and understand how they tie together thats as close we can come how all was created i’d say

[13:26] Gemma Allen: i think it is finding good stuff

[13:26] herman Bergson: to say that we are to stupid to find the "Big thing" behind everything already assumes the Big thing

[13:26] Areyn Laurasia: "The more philosophically simple a thing is, the more perfect it is."... back to the atom?

[13:26] Gemma Allen: that god ma hine named is misleading

[13:27] Daruma Boa: i saw a documentation about the refute of darwin

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: maybe but as said its the closest we have to find the creator if we relate t to religion

[13:27] herman Bergson: Refute Darwin even???

[13:27] Daruma Boa: yes that there are a lot of gaps in evolution

[13:27] Daruma Boa: and no one likes to explain that

[13:28] Daruma Boa: cos there are no answers

[13:28] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:28] Genji Shikibu: that does not disprove it tho

[13:28] herman Bergson: but that observation doesn’t justify a thing. I would say

[13:28] Honey  Bee: life is

[13:28] Daruma Boa: we humans are afraid to see new things

[13:28] herman Bergson: those are assumptions Daruma.....

[13:28] Gemma Allen: not scientists

[13:28] Areyn Laurasia: I love to see new things :)

[13:29] Gemma Allen: Yes-ah!

[13:29] Daruma Boa: no there are a lot of scientist how explain it mom

[13:29] Bejiita Imako: religious people however often totally oppose science

[13:29] Gemma Allen: as long as they don't make life more difficult

[13:29] herman Bergson: Science is nothing but finding new things....even show that Einstein was wrong if possible :-)

[13:30] Daruma Boa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH9ZTq6FAyY

[13:30] Genji Shikibu: people pick and choose which science to believe

[13:30] Daruma Boa: but its a german scientist from the munich university

[13:30] herman Bergson: what  is it Daruma? :-)

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: hmm science however proves how stuff really work but observing it, not relate it to some strange being no one have really seen

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: some

[13:30] Genji Shikibu: they are happy to get electricity, technology or surgery without understanding it

[13:30] herman Bergson: But to get back to our Arab philosophers.....

[13:31] Daruma Boa: a refute of darwin

[13:31] Genji Shikibu: but deny other things for the same reason

[13:31] Daruma Boa: not all what darwin said is not true

[13:31] herman Bergson: What puzzles me is how they could have such extensive descriptions of god

[13:31] Areyn Laurasia: Arab philosophers who are muslims and learn from christians and teach to jew

[13:31] Daruma Boa: but well, we must be now now a bite more

[13:31] Daruma Boa: and we don’t

[13:31] Areyn Laurasia: it's a pursuit of knowledge..

[13:31] Gemma Allen: ♥ LOL ♥

[13:31] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:31] Bejiita Imako: i guess so

[13:32] Genji Shikibu: the descriptions and stories are parables and poetry... to assist understanding... but they are taken as dictionary definitions

[13:32] Gemma Allen: i guess it is what they would want their god to be

[13:32] Daruma Boa: and that must us keep think

[13:32] herman Bergson: The Arabs learnt from the greek and then taught the catholics in 1000 AD

[13:32] Daruma Boa: or think in another way

[13:32] Genji Shikibu: the Koran is poetry

[13:32] herman Bergson: a lot of philosophy is too in my opinion :-))

[13:33] Bejiita Imako: true ㋡

[13:33] Genji Shikibu: poetry explains more than prose

[13:33] Gemma Allen: true

[13:33] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:34] herman Bergson: this would lead to a discussionon the concept of "explaining" Genji.....

[13:34] Honey  Bee: yes professor Philosphy is poetry

[13:34] Genji Shikibu: do you really want to go there?

[13:34] herman Bergson: actually ^_^......no

[13:35] Gemma Allen: ♥ LOL ♥

[13:35] herman Bergson: I think now you have some idea how the debate between ratio and religion is an old old one....

[13:35] Gemma Allen: another 5 years of class

[13:35] Bejiita Imako: hahha

[13:35] Areyn Laurasia: only 5 years? :)

[13:35] Bejiita Imako: loool

[13:35] Gemma Allen: well

[13:35] herman Bergson: and that is rather fascinating.....

[13:35] Daruma Boa: yes it is herman.

[13:36] Bejiita Imako: indeed

[13:36] Daruma Boa: they all knew 1.000 of years ago

[13:36] herman Bergson: But one thing you can conclude.....

[13:36] Daruma Boa: and wedo not know more now

[13:36] Daruma Boa: ^^

[13:36] herman Bergson: in that debate in Islamic philosophy the ratio lost the debate after 1100AD

[13:37] herman Bergson: We do know some more now Daruma....I would say.....

[13:37] herman Bergson: for example....the flue is not a punishment of the lord but just a virus for instance

[13:37] .: Beertje :.: sorry I have to go...have a goodnight all

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:37] Areyn Laurasia: good night Beertje

[13:37] Honey  Bee: good night

[13:38] Bejiita Imako: night beerte

[13:38] herman Bergson: Bye Beertje :-)

[13:38] Ciska Riverstone: good night beertje

[13:38] .: Beertje :.: bye bye

[13:38] Genji Shikibu: good night beertje

[13:38] Daruma Boa: in some things yes

[13:38] Bejiita Imako: indeed sickness are caused by bacteria and virus, not your sins

[13:39] Daruma Boa: but not the main questions.

[13:39] Daruma Boa: what is life and where are we from^^

[13:39] herman Bergson: neither are earthquakes the wrath of god...but just moving tectonic plates on this globes

[13:39] Gemma Allen: that is why the class does continue... always more questions

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: haha yes

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: and we don’t want this to end don’t we?

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:39] Daruma Boa: i want to know^^

[13:40] herman Bergson: "what is life and where are we from"...besides Islamic philosophy but a big question indeed

[13:40] Bejiita Imako: there is always more to know

[13:40] Bejiita Imako: aha

[13:40] herman Bergson: To begin with it contains an ssumption.....

[13:40] Areyn Laurasia: does it matter?

[13:40] Daruma Boa: i am SO curious^^

[13:40] Bejiita Imako: many big questions remain to be answered

[13:40] herman Bergson: and that is ...Where are we FROM?"

[13:41] herman Bergson: from where....who says we are form somewhere...we are jsut here :-)

[13:41] Honey  Bee: my question is WHY?

[13:41] Daruma Boa: yes but why we are here?

[13:41] herman Bergson: the WHY question....

[13:41] Daruma Boa: we can think and no one can think^^

[13:41] Bejiita Imako: cause we are ㋡

[13:41] herman Bergson: ok...watch this….. :-)

[13:41] Daruma Boa: but i am sure there is a reason why humans can think^^

[13:41] Areyn Laurasia: so we can create?

[13:42] Daruma Boa: yes but what we create?

[13:42] herman Bergson: the first thing we know is that we are....

[13:42] Daruma Boa: mostly not useful things...

[13:42] Areyn Laurasia: for survival.. out of necessity

[13:42] Genji Shikibu: yes... survival

[13:42] herman Bergson: the second thing we know when we look around is that we can ask ..why is that happening....

[13:42] Genji Shikibu: the rest is gravey

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: one thin we are good at is build machines to make us faster and stronger

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: cars and hydraulics for ex

[13:42] herman Bergson: but here is the catch....

[13:42] Daruma Boa: mhh bejita....

[13:42] Gemma Allen: internet for example

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: and help our mind with the computer

[13:42] Daruma Boa: is that really necessary?

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: with

[13:43] herman Bergson: does it make sense to apply this question to ourselves?

[13:43] herman Bergson: why are we here?

[13:43] Daruma Boa: thats a question which everyone should ask himself

[13:43] Daruma Boa: perhaps

[13:43] Genji Shikibu: i say yes

[13:43] Honey  Bee: it might be to keep us alive , this is why we do all or most things

[13:43] Daruma Boa: no only hope keeps up alive.

[13:43] Daruma Boa: the hope that everything will be better

[13:44] herman Bergson: the question has two sides...a subjective one and an objective one....

[13:44] Daruma Boa: without that i do anything fro that^^

[13:44] herman Bergson: dont confuse them

[13:44] Daruma Boa: true herman

[13:44] Daruma Boa: lol ok^^

[13:44] Genji Shikibu: instinct keeps us alive...

[13:44] Daruma Boa: mhhh long discussion about that

[13:44] herman Bergson: that is not an answer to a why Genji, but yet a fact

[13:45] Genji Shikibu: you are right

[13:45] Honey  Bee: we must evolve and change or we will not continue to live

[13:45] Genji Shikibu: we must face Climate Change or we will not have much of a life

[13:45] herman Bergson: that "must" in your statement Honey......

[13:46] Honey  Bee: yes

[13:46] Areyn Laurasia: it's not like we really have a choice

[13:46] herman Bergson: I think we evolve indeed in a Darwinian sense....

[13:46] Daruma Boa: ah i guess we all have a choice

[13:46] Daruma Boa: i do not guess

[13:46] Honey  Bee: yes we have a choice , we change or not and have disaster like we have today

[13:46] Daruma Boa: we have it

[13:46] herman Bergson: but look at it in periods of at least 500 years....not in a single lifetime

[13:47] Areyn Laurasia: barely a blink of an eye

[13:47] Genji Shikibu: look at what in terms of 500 years

[13:47] herman Bergson: yes Honey.....we have to evolve and leave our present stupidity behind :-)

[13:47] herman Bergson: but that will take centuries :-))

[13:47] Gemma Allen: yep

[13:48] Gemma Allen: well at least we know it

[13:48] herman Bergson: but we will eventually is my expectation

[13:48] Gemma Allen: too bad we won't be here to see it

[13:48] Daruma Boa: who knows^^

[13:48] herman Bergson: maybe first 90% of the worldpopulation has to be destroyed...I dont know...but we will

[13:48] Honey  Bee: yes herman

[13:49] Gemma Allen: or find a new planet

[13:49] herman Bergson: no Gemma...as I said....a lifetime is just a drop in the ocean

[13:49] herman Bergson: but I dont mind..:-)

[13:50] herman Bergson: And when you ask me "Why are we here?"

[13:50] herman Bergson: I would answer...

[13:50] herman Bergson: I dont know but I am here because I enjoy life ^_^

[13:50] Daruma Boa: ;-)

[13:50] Honey  Bee: :)) heheh good answer professor

[13:50] Genji Shikibu: I believe each of us must find our own purpose

[13:51] herman Bergson: yes Genji....

[13:51] Gemma Allen: that makes sense

[13:51] Daruma Boa: true.and i hope we all will find it

[13:51] Genji Shikibu: actually, you taught me that

[13:51] Honey  Bee: true but humanity as a whole why where we created

[13:51] herman Bergson: My pleasure genji...

[13:52] Genji Shikibu: didn't say I liked it... just said you taught me that

[13:52] herman Bergson: why are there birds inthe sky Honey....

[13:52] Gemma Allen: ohoh

[13:52] Honey  Bee: ok because they are

[13:52] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:52] herman Bergson: I know Genji....yet...it has a meaning

[13:52] Genji Shikibu: yes

[13:52] herman Bergson: and thus we are Honey :-)

[13:52] Areyn Laurasia: by thinking and overflowing thoughts.. to bring the next level into being... like al farabi thought?

[13:53] herman Bergson: Welll I think we got quite philosophical today :-)

[13:53] Bejiita Imako: hehe

[13:53] Areyn Laurasia: but it's practical and very present :)

[13:53] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your good thinking....

[13:53] Bejiita Imako: YAY! (yay!)

[13:53] Daruma BoaDaruma Boa claps

[13:53] Gemma Allen: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥

[13:53] Bejiita Imako: ok cu soon all

[13:53] Honey  Bee: Thank you Professor :))

[13:53] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:53] herman Bergson: Class dismissed...

[13:53] Areyn Laurasia: Thanks for class..

[13:53] Gemma Allen: Bye, Bye  ㋡ 

[13:53] Gemma Allen: for now

[13:53] Ciska Riverstone: thanks hermann thanx all

524: Al Farabi

Let’s listen to some words of Al Farabi (died c. 950): “The substance of the First is a substance from which every existent emanates, however it may be, whether perfect or deficient. 

But the substance of the First is also such that all the existents, when they emanate from it, are arranged in an order of rank, and that every existent gets its allotted share and rank of existence from it. 

It starts with the most perfect existent and is followed by something a little less perfect than it. (..) Inasmuch as the substance of the First is a substance from which all the existence emanate, 

... it is generous and its generosity is in its substance; and inasmuch as all the existents receive their order of rank from it, ... the First is just.”

Are you still with me? I don’t think that you’ll hear such words from a contemporary philosopher anymore and yet for some reason scholars were impressed by them in those days.

For al-Farabl, the First Cause is the summit of existence, uncaused, self-subsistent, unmoved, intrinsically perfect; even so, the lower levels of existence mirror its perfection. 

The human soul and the human body are also governed hierarchically: In the body, the heart rules and is followed by the brain, under which all other organs are subordinated. 

Likewise, human society is arranged in orders of perfection: The ruler of this excellent city stands in relation to his subjects as the First Cause stands in relation to all other existents. 

The order of existence is thus not only hierarchical but microcosmic: Each order of being is such that it mirrors a higher order and is itself reflected in a lower.

But why did they believe in such metaphysical theories then? One important reason, in my opinion, is the influence of religion and the other is Aristotle. What he had achieved was unique.

He had created order in thinking. For instance, now we call it “Set Theory” and we use Venn Diagrams, but in those days it was a impressive innovation: logic 

The basic rule is, that if  in a valid reasoning the premises were true, the conclusion is also necessarily true. Just imagine, whatever you say, you can not deny the truth of the conclusion!

And with the universal ideas (Plato) or categories (Aristotle) he had organized our observations. Everything could be classified under a general name, the genus, 

and differentiated from other things of the same genus by a specific property, so that you get a species, like man = living being with rationality; animal = living being without rationality.

Thus was the discovery of Al Farabi and as with Aristotle his logic falls into two divisions, the first of these comprising the doctrine of Ideas and Definitions and the second, the doctrine of Judgments, Inferences, and Proofs. 

Ideas have in themselves no relation to reality, that is to say, they are neither true nor false. Among 'Ideas' Al Farabi recognizes here the simplest psychological forms, that is, both the representations of individual objects arising from Sense-Perception, 

and those ideas which have been stamped upon the mind from the First Intellect, such as the Necessary, the Actual, the Possible. The real metaphysical ideas, of which we ask ourselves now: where did he get them from?

Such representations and ideas are immediately certain. A man's mind may be directed to these, and his soul made observant of them, 

but they cannot be demonstrated to him, nor can they be explained by deriving them from what is known, seeing that they are already clear in themselves, and that too with the highest degree of certitude.

In the latter it is as if you hear Descartes, who also claimed to know such clear  and certain ideas. There metaphysical explanation was then and is now clear: they come from The First Mover, The First Intellect, God.  

Such line of thinking, put into the machinery of Aristotelian logic has burdened us for centuries with all kinds of almost cosmological theories.

One of the last, who closed the door on this approach was Thomas Fludd, who in 1617 stil created the pictures behind  me, where you can see the geocentric structure of the Macrocosmos and how man is connected to the cosmos.

Such descriptions of reality you now only find but esoteric philosophies today,

Thank you.... ^_^

The Discussion

[13:31] herman Bergson: You endured it quite well, I must say :-))

[13:32] .: Beertje :.: hmm..may I ask..were is the woman in this?...you are only talking about man...

[13:32] herman Bergson: hmmm...you fell asleep ^_^

[13:32] Lizzy Pleides: there's nothing to endure

[13:32] herman Bergson: Beertje...

[13:32] herman Bergson: The first project ever I did was about 100 philosophers

[13:33] herman Bergson: among them were TWO women!

[13:33] .: Beertje :.: and?...

[13:33] Lizzy Pleides: 98 men

[13:33] herman Bergson: So my next project was about woman philosophers

[13:34] .: Beertje :.: a short project?

[13:34] herman Bergson: I had found 35 women through the ages :-)

[13:34] .: Beertje :.: but all those philosophers talk about man..even the picture in the circle is a man..as far as I can see....

[13:34] Areyn Laurasia: yet we outnumber attendance in the class 3:1

[13:35] herman Bergson: uhuh...in the other one it is a woman :-)

[13:35] Areyn Laurasia: perhaps it's more symbolic.. like woman is mother earth.. and nature

[13:35] herman Bergson: and a second problem is that women in Arabaic culture do not count that much

[13:36] herman Bergson: Don’t blame me for that :-)

[13:38] .: Beertje :.: i can't discus this lecture yet..it's far beyond my head...sorry

[13:38] herman Bergson: What I don’t feel is what they must have feelt in those days........

[13:38] herman Bergson: They were franticly translating the works of Aristotle and Plato in those days.....

[13:39] herman Bergson: I think it must have felt the same as for us a new book of our favorite author

[13:39] Areyn Laurasia: Seems they were more open to the free flow and sharing of knowledge.

[13:39] herman Bergson: and besides that.....if a book was complete...how many copies were there....?

[13:40] herman Bergson: this was of course only an issue of the ruling class

[13:40] herman Bergson: The calif financed the translations

[13:40] herman Bergson: Maybe...the more knowledge the more power..?

[13:41] .: Beertje :.: most translations are not very secure

[13:41] Qwark Allen: i`ll say , the less the population know, the easier to control it

[13:41] .: Beertje :.: maybe they wrote what the kalief would hear or read?

[13:41] Lizzy Pleides: still today we say that knowledge is power

[13:41] herman Bergson: no Beertje.....

[13:42] herman Bergson: They had a deep respect for the greek philosophers, especially Aristotle...

[13:42] herman Bergson: I really wonder how it was in those days......

[13:42] Areyn Laurasia: The world today could use more of the same openness from those days.

[13:43] Lizzy Pleides: we need a time machine

[13:43] .: Beertje :.: but there are always words that can't be translated...look in our own language..."gezelligheid"..it doesn't exist in any other language

[13:43] herman Bergson: Was there someone waiting impatiently for the translation of the next page for instance?

[13:43] herman Bergson: Of course they ran into such difficulties Beertje...they are also documented

[13:44] herman Bergson: also

[13:44] herman Bergson: Same happened with the Jesuits in China....

[13:44] herman Bergson: Chinese had no word for God in the monotheistic catholic sense...

[13:45] herman Bergson: Bu the works of Aristotle are rather technical....

[13:45] herman Bergson: on reasoning, classification, definition.....

[13:47] Qwark Allen: would be very abstract the meaning of God to the chinese

[13:47] .: Beertje :.: could the population ..the common man and woman..read the book?

[13:47] herman Bergson: no, I don’t think so.....

[13:48] herman Bergson: In India education was accessible for everybody who showed intelligence.....

[13:48] Qwark Allen: in those days education was not for the comon population

[13:48] herman Bergson: Bu tint the Arabic world.....?

[13:48] herman Bergson: I don’t know...

[13:48] herman Bergson: and not for women ....

[13:48] Qwark Allen: ahahaha true

[13:49] Qwark Allen: should be much worst then now for sure

[13:49] Qwark Allen: maybe in the monasteries

[13:49] herman Bergson: Which was the same in Europe for cnturies too btw :-)

[13:49] Qwark Allen: yes

[13:49] Qwark Allen: darn dark ages

[13:50] herman Bergson: From an intellectual point of view they werent dark at all

[13:50] Qwark Allen: they were to the mass population

[13:50] herman Bergson: scholarship and education were at a high standard....

[13:50] Qwark Allen: for the rich

[13:50] Qwark Allen: °͜° l ☺ ☻ ☺ l °͜°

[13:50] Qwark Allen: lol

[13:50] .: Beertje :.: yes for the happy few

[13:51] herman Bergson: yes and those knights were peasants :-)

[13:51] Qwark Allen: ehehh

[13:51] herman Bergson: Well around 1700 there were only a handful of real scientific minds in Europe.....

[13:51] Areyn Laurasia: How many philosophers through the ages have an interest in science as well?

[13:52] herman Bergson: Well...started with Pythagoras and Archimede

[13:52] .: Beertje :.: and how many arabic philosophers?

[13:52] herman Bergson: then the real "scientist” were the alchemists

[13:52] herman Bergson: all of them Beertje....

[13:53] herman Bergson: they were specialized in astronomy mathematics medicine......that was common practice

[13:53] herman Bergson: that is the big historical issue....

[13:54] herman Bergson: till 1100 they were the greatest mathematicians present on earth....

[13:54] herman Bergson: all their wisdom reached Europe through Spain....

[13:54] herman Bergson: and after 1200 all was gone....

[13:54] Lizzy Pleides: they were polymaths

[13:54] herman Bergson: yes Lizzy....

[13:54] .: Beertje :.: why was it gone after 1200?

[13:54] Qwark Allen: in a way they are still in the dark ages

[13:54] Qwark Allen: °͜° l ☺ ☻ ☺ l °͜°

[13:54] Qwark Allen: lol

[13:54] herman Bergson: But is disappeared into the desert

[13:54] .: Beertje :.: what happend?

[13:55] herman Bergson: I really don’t know what caused this development

[13:55] Qwark Allen: come to my mind the same fate of karl marx ideas

[13:55] Areyn Laurasia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasids

[13:55] Lizzy Pleides: religious fanatics probably?

[13:55] herman Bergson: The  only explanation I can think of that they just went down fighting their religious wors

[13:56] Qwark Allen: think... the less the population know, the easier to control it

[13:56] .: Beertje :.: yes Qwark,,that was in Europe in the last century too

[13:57] herman Bergson: Abbasids.....isnt that the period of religious wars..fitnas or something like that?

[13:57] Lizzy Pleides: in spain the muslims must have been still very tolerant

[13:57] Qwark Allen: they kept the religion part to control the population, and reduced the access to knowledge to everyone

[13:57] .: Beertje :.: yes

[13:57] .: Beertje :.: true

[13:57] Qwark Allen: if you look in the recent past

[13:57] Qwark Allen: you have karl marx

[13:57] Areyn Laurasia: No idea.. but I thought it was a time of great growth and knowledge until 1258 when the the Abbasid caliphate got broken up.

[13:58] herman Bergson: yes...that was it Areyn.....

[13:58] Qwark Allen: still think that its much worst to the arabians

[13:58] Qwark Allen: its like a milenia under this totalitarian system

[13:59] herman Bergson: I think  that the imams have taken over since 1258....and stayed in power since then

[13:59] Areyn Laurasia: They were doing better then.. while the East-West schism happened in 1054..

[13:59] herman Bergson: which meant total stagnation

[13:59] Qwark Allen: yes herman, terrible

[14:00] herman Bergson: Like I said in a previous lecture......

[14:00] herman Bergson: Arabs aren’t fighting each other individually like we do....

[14:00] Areyn Laurasia: have a read at the wiki, Qwark :) I was enlightened.

[14:01] herman Bergson: they fight as one group of believers agains another group which they see as non believers

[14:01] herman Bergson: since 640 they have been fighting religious wars among each other

[14:02] herman Bergson: and in Syria today they still do

[14:02] .: Beertje :.: is there nobody that thinks.,.what are we doing???

[14:02] herman Bergson: like in other parts where tribal and religous groups coincide

[14:03] herman Bergson: no Beertje, that is not how masses operate....

[14:03] Lizzy Pleides: they think they get to heaven directly when they die for their ideals

[14:03] herman Bergson: even in a group...when one asks...he man what are we doing, he might be shot imediately  as a non believer

[14:03] Areyn Laurasia: How's that, Beertje?

[14:04] .: Beertje :.: how is what Areyn?

[14:04] Areyn Laurasia: The questions about what are we doing?

[14:04] herman Bergson: we are not so much different......

[14:04] herman Bergson: Who has the guts in a group to question authority?

[14:05] .: Beertje :.: uhmm..i don't know what you mean

[14:05] Qwark Allen: eheheh

[14:05] Areyn Laurasia: What are we doing in the class now or in general? I was trying to understand the context.

[14:05] herman Bergson: Look at the PVV fractie :-)

[14:05] .: Beertje :.: ja...

[14:05] .: Beertje :.: treurig

[14:06] herman Bergson: We are looking at the history of Arabic philosphy Areyn

[14:06] .: Beertje :.: [14:02] Beertje Beaumont: is there nobody that thinks.,.what are we doing???..I ment ..those people in Arabia...

[14:06] Lizzy Pleides: could you explain that please? PVV fractie?

[14:06] herman Bergson: and at this moment in particular at the great influence of Greek philosophy on Arabic philosophy.....

[14:07] Areyn Laurasia: yes, I was refering to Beertje's question :)

[14:07] herman Bergson: PVV is a right wing party....fraktie is a dutch word...for the group im parlement...

[14:08] Lizzy Pleides: Fraktion in german

[14:08] Qwark Allen: omg, i have to go

[14:08] herman Bergson: Google translates it as Parlementairy group

[14:08] Qwark Allen: was really nice this class herman!!!

[14:08] .: Beertje :.: bye Qwark:)

[14:08] Areyn Laurasia: bye Qwark

[14:08] Qwark Allen: ˜*•. ˜”*°•.˜”*°•  Bye !  •°*”˜.•°*”˜ .•*˜   ㋡

[14:08] Qwark Allen: for now

[14:09] herman Bergson: Ye sindeed it is geting late!!!!!1

[14:09] Lizzy Pleides: TC Qwark

[14:09] Qwark Allen: 10 minutes past

[14:09] Qwark Allen: °͜° l ☺ ☻ ☺ l °͜°

[14:09] Qwark Allen: lol

[14:09] .: Beertje :.: I have to go too...it's late....thank you Herman for this wonderfull lecture

[14:09] Qwark Allen: we got distracted with the discussion

[14:09] Qwark Allen: which is a good sign

[14:09] Qwark Allen: ^^

[14:09] Areyn Laurasia: wonders now what PVV has to do with arabic philosophy :)

[14:09] herman Bergson: ok....emergency Class Dismissed :-)

[14:10] Lizzy Pleides: lol

[14:10] Qwark Allen: °͜° l ☺ ☻ ☺ l °͜°

[14:10] Qwark Allen: lol

[14:10] .: Beertje :.: Goodnight and sweet dreams about any 'fraktie'

[14:10] Lizzy Pleides: thank you herman, byeeee

[14:10] herman Bergson: I'd rather not

[14:10] Areyn Laurasia: Happy Easter for those who celebrate and happy chocolate weekend to the rest :)

[14:10] .: Beertje :.: lol

[14:11] Areyn Laurasia: good night :)

[14:11] herman Bergson: Good night Areyn :-))

523; Islamic metaphysics

The word universal,  used as a noun, has belonged to the vocabulary of English-writing philosophers since the sixteenth century, but the concept of universals, and the problems raised by it, has a far longer history.

It goes back through the universalia  of medieval philosophy to Plato’s with his Ideas and Aristotle with his categories.  

Indeed, Plato may be taken to be the father of this perennial topic of philosophy, for it is in his dialogues that we find the first arguments for universals and the first discussion of the difficulties they raise. 

Plato believed that the existence of universals was required not only ontologically, to explain the nature of the world that as sentient and reflective beings we experience, but also epistemologically, to explain the nature of our experience of it.

And by this Plato was in fact the father of the same philosophical non issue as Descartes has been with his dualism by splitting up body and mind.

However, in both cases these philosophical solutions to fundamental questions suited the dominating religions of those days and maybe even today quite well.

Let me explain it in a simple way. All animals recognize their own kind. Dogs in particular for in my experience they start barking completely insane when they see a fellow dog. So does man… I mean recognizing his own kind.

But we do more, we wonder about the question how we can be able to recognize another man as human being?

The problem is: you have John, Mary, Pete, Harry, Maria and they have one thing in common: being human.

Now comes the philosophical catch: but where did I get this concept “being human” from? Did I know it in advance,

so that I could classify the people under that category, or did I just discover in the long run what they had in common, what I then called “being human”?

If you would answer: Well this is just the way our senses in relation to the working of our brain respond to sensory experiences. Thus general concepts are formed,

first of all you had to wait for John Locke who started this debate with his  Essay on Human Understanding (1690). For cognitive psychology and neuroscience you have to wait another couple of centuries.

But no, the philosophers started to wonder about the ontological status of universals. In what sense do they exist? In what sense are they real.

And these questions are most convenient for theologians, because they have the answer. The perfect general Ideas exist only in the mind of God and because he is thinking them, we can think them.

This is the simple way to put it, but wait till Metaphysics gets in. Then this line of thinking is wrapped up in such complex and elaborate theoretical constructions.

The most impressive works here is from the Arabic philosopher Al-Farabi (872 - 951 in Damascus). As expert on Aristotle he created a whole system of First Mover, Active Intellect and so on and so on.

Each level of existence in al-Farabi's cosmology is characterized by its movement towards perfection, which is to become like the First Cause; a perfect intellect. 

Human perfection (or "happiness"), then, is equated with constant intellection and contemplation. And again a philosophy that tells us, that we have to become like a self invented idea.

The Discussion

[13:17] herman Bergson: Thank you...^_^

[13:17] herman Bergson: Take the floor if you feel to :-)

[13:18] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: did al farabi existed before the coran was written?

[13:19] herman Bergson: I always forget dates....:-(

[13:19] nu: how is perfection measured

[13:19] herman Bergson: But the Quran was written between 609 and 643 it is said

[13:20] Bejiita Imako: ok

[13:20] herman Bergson: Don't ask me Nu.....

[13:20] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: thanks y

[13:20] nu: i am not asking

[13:20] herman Bergson: I even dont know what to think of this First Intellect and so on

[13:20] .: Beertje :.: what is perfection?

[13:21] Areyn Laurasia: a state of stagnancy?

[13:21] nu: that is what one must have in mind if we are to measure our progress in that direction

[13:21] herman Bergson: But such theories are just the imaginationof one person......

[13:21] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: what if now, the race toward perfectibility , is link with universal . and against diversity

[13:22] nu: we are always making comparisons

[13:22] herman Bergson: Ok Alaya...the ultimate and perfect human being!

[13:22] Areyn Laurasia: ohoh.. are we going into eugenics?

[13:22] herman Bergson: and we all gonna belong to that category.....

[13:23] .: Beertje :.: why would we want to be perfect?

[13:23] herman Bergson: no.....that would be just an arbitrary choice....

[13:23] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: i meaned culturally talking, not geneticlaly talking Areyn

[13:23] herman Bergson: Yes Beertje...that is the question too...

[13:23] herman Bergson: but all religions teach us that we are loosers unless we work on perfecting ourselves

[13:24] .: Beertje :.: ah don't believe them ㋡

[13:24] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:24] Lizzy Pleides: not only the religions

[13:24] .: Beertje :.: we are not loosers

[13:24] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: and they teached it toward universals as yu said

[13:24] nu: i dont believe i am a loser

[13:24] herman Bergson: well...the human being should eventually be one with the mind of (some) god

[13:25] herman Bergson: Neither do I Nu:-))

[13:25] nu: i dont accept the doctrine of original sin

[13:25] Bejiita Imako: thats the goal i guess in all religions sort of

[13:25] herman Bergson: but that is not the point culturally

[13:25] Areyn Laurasia: what if god is not some super being but just nature and knowledge?

[13:25] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: ah the return to the adamic,, state, well, if adam was alone, there was no unversal for all,

[13:26] herman Bergson: epistemologically we would havea problem then yes :-)

[13:26] herman Bergson: because knowledge is a product of our brain and nature is just there

[13:26] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: plus he might have beena monkey

[13:26] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: apparently

[13:27] herman Bergson: If you want to learn something about arabic metaphysics read something about AL-Farabi :-)

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: ok

[13:28] herman Bergson: It is amazing to read in which he put his intellect and energy and time....

[13:28] herman Bergson: IN those days a new discovery of the mind I assume...

[13:29] herman Bergson: from my perpective here and now a complete waste of time

[13:29] .: Beertje :.: but he didn't know that..

[13:29] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: so the mind, desire to reach or to know or to recognize, was seen as a metaphysic thing?

[13:30] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: he might have been a first degree psychologist

[13:30] herman Bergson: some conclusions of the mind were seen like that....and with the discovery of logic they thought of all kinds of things by inference....

[13:30] herman Bergson: He was Alaya

[13:30] herman Bergson: In his time he really was a great intellect....

[13:31] herman Bergson: and in that sense you should not judge him with our standards....

[13:31] nu: one cannot criticize him that the path he took bore little fruit

[13:31] herman Bergson: it is just amazing what such an intellect succeeded to construct....in metaphysics

[13:31] nu: someone had to take that path

[13:32] Areyn Laurasia: Think of all the time and energy you saved because he took that path for you.

[13:32] Bejiita Imako: i guess so

[13:32] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:32] herman Bergson: no Nu....in a time without science...without the knowledge we have now......

[13:32] Bejiita Imako: thats all they had back then

[13:32] herman Bergson: They just started to discover that there existed Air ans something like a vacuum.....

[13:32] herman Bergson: Al-Farabi experimented with it...

[13:33] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: i am not convince that they knew less than us, on human minds, since they had lesser material to take care of, and more time, to study humans

[13:33] nu: he seemed to be a natural scientist

[13:34] herman Bergson: and astronomer and psychologist and philosopher....

[13:34] Bejiita Imako: a little of everything

[13:34] nu: now we are faced with the prospect that machines will soon have intelligence

[13:34] herman Bergson: I yet would say that they knew less about the human brain and the mind then we do now

[13:34] nu: how do we deal with that

[13:34] herman Bergson: they all ready have depending on the definition

[13:35] herman Bergson: the real problem is ..can machines have a mind....

[13:35] herman Bergson: and there I can be of some comfort.....

[13:35] Bejiita Imako: machine intelligence would be that it can analyse an input and then reprogram its behaviour based in that

[13:35] nu: i dont see why self awareness is not possible

[13:35] herman Bergson: we ourselves still havent the slightest idea how we can have a mind

[13:36] Bejiita Imako: but a computer is just as smart as a light switch basically

[13:36] Bejiita Imako: on and off

[13:36] Bejiita Imako: however bilions of times per second

[13:36] Bejiita Imako: and thats what give it power

[13:36] Areyn Laurasia: just think about google

[13:36] herman Bergson: dont be fooled Nu....responding to an environment by a machine isnt a proof of selfawareness

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: a machine can never be aware of its surroundings, all it 2sees" are these electrical impulses

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: 100010101101010101

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: nothing more

[13:37] nu: it ini the machine will realize what and eho it is

[13:37] Areyn Laurasia: when they know who you are, what you like, your friends and family, personal interests, habits.. etc.. etc.. location and they have drones.. we are writing ourselves out of history

[13:38] herman Bergson: As soon as a machine says.."I think, so I am" without being programmed to do so and claims a private life we should get worried

[13:38] Bejiita Imako: what make what we see with computers possible ate the digital analog converter that turn the 1 and 0 to things we can see and hear

[13:38] nu: not necessarilywhy is that

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: but that in turn the compuer cant understand, the DAC and ADC circuits is an inpenetrable barieer between our analog world and the mind of the machine

[13:39] herman Bergson: Because then the machine is aware of its own identity....

[13:39] nu: it is difficult to predict the furure

[13:39] Areyn Laurasia: machine intelligence is more than a machine

[13:39] nu: we are all machines

[13:39] herman Bergson: yes

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: we only see analog the computer only see digital thats it

[13:39] herman Bergson: like our mind is more thanjust our brain

[13:40] Bejiita Imako: thats why a computer can never feel what we do

[13:40] nu: our intelligenvce is the result of superb self organizaion

[13:40] herman Bergson: But I tink our discussion has left already for some time the Arabina deserts and has moved into another :-)

[13:40] Areyn Laurasia: sorry, professor :)

[13:41] herman Bergson: Let me thank you allll for your participation again and pay Al Farabi a visit in Wikipedia :-)

[13:41] herman Bergson: Class dismissed ...^_^

[13:41] Bejiita Imako: ill check

[13:41] Areyn Laurasia: Thanks for class

[13:41] nu: yet we have neurons OK

[13:41] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: cu soon again ㋡

[13:42] Areyn Laurasia: Al Farabi.. I wonder if he meant the multiverse

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: thank you herman thanx all

[13:42] CONNIE Eichel: great class, as always :)

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:42] .: Beertje :.: thank you Herman:)

[13:42] nu: Lizzie thank you for inviting me here

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: bye

[13:43] Bernadettie: Yes, thank you

[13:43] Areyn Laurasia: back to the sandbox..

[13:43] Lizzy Pleides: you are welcome nu

[13:43] CONNIE Eichel: kisses you all, till next class :)

[13:43] CONNIE Eichel: byeeee :)

[13:43] herman Bergson: What is happening there Areyn?

[13:43] Areyn Laurasia: inventory cleaning.. unfortunately :)

[13:43] Lizzy Pleides: tc all!

[13:43] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: thanks yu, i will read more of al farabi.. i think

[13:43] Areyn Laurasia: such is the reality of SL :S

[13:44] herman Bergson: oh my...dont remind me of it!

[13:44] Areyn Laurasia: :)

[13:44] Areyn Laurasia: have a lovely evening :)

[13:44] .: Beertje :.: have a goodnight ㋡

[13:44] Alaya Chépaspourquoi: be well^^

[13:45] herman Bergson: You too Alaya :-)n