Person:
BİRGÜL, MEHMET FATİH

Loading...
Profile Picture

Email Address

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Job Title

Last Name

BİRGÜL

First Name

MEHMET FATİH

Name

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Publication
    On the "psychological dialectic" of al-ghazali regarding philosophers, or did ibn sina drink wine?
    (Bursa İlahiyat Vakfı, 2019-12-01) Birgül, Mehmet; BİRGÜL, MEHMET FATİH; Uludağ Üniversitesi; 0000-0002-9404-6266; AAG-8525-2021
    Al-Ghazali, one of the most influential figures in the history of Islamic thought, criticized the prominent religious paradigms of his day. In this regard, his settling of accounts with philosophers from whom he benefitted in terms of methodology is particularly significant and consists of three stages: first, the identification; then, the description; and finally, the judgment of the philosophers by means of dialectic criticism. There are comprehensive studies on the theoretical aspects of this struggle between al-Ghazali and the philosophers; nevertheless, his psychological dialectic, which he advances in a manner that addresses the common feelings of Muslims, is often overlooked. This paper examines al-Ghazali's allegation that Ibn Sina used to drink wine, since it is one of the most impressive examples of the conception that al-Ghazali tried to establish regarding philosophers and philosophy by showing how weak the relationship is between philosophers and Islam. The objective is to obtain a deeper view of the content and construction of al-Ghazali's psychological dialectic.
  • Publication
    The shepherd of being or the prayer of being: Some remarks on heidegger and Nurettin Topcu
    (Beytül Hikmet Uluslararası Felsefe, 2017-12-01) Birgül, Mehmet; BİRGÜL, MEHMET FATİH; İlahiyat Fakültesi; Felsefe ve Din Bilimleri Bölümü; 0000-0002-9404-6266; AAG-8525-2021
    Although there are radical differences between two philosophers, Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) and Nurettin Topcu (1909-1975), both are united in not to have a modern way of thinking When one looks carefully, it appears that the main concern of both thinkers is the question of being. The parallelism between two ideas, the one is Heidegger's criticism of the Western metaphysical tradition expressed "forgetfulness of being" and the other Topcu's criticism of the Eastern thought "forgetfulness of truth", exposes serious similarities especially critics on epistemologies and ontologies produced by the modern way of thinking Heidegger sees roots of the way of thinking forgets being in Plato. Turning to equalize truth and right, and reducing being to an idea, this approach constitutes the beginning of humanism. Despite thinking on a Platonic base, Topcu identifies poverty of the thinking advances in the antinomy of rationalism and empiricism, even desperate consequences expose humanity.
  • Publication
    Ibn rushd's critics of al-Farabi's analysis about 'universal and personal accident' in talkhis al-maqulat or on the ontological and epistemic substance
    (Beytülhikme Felsefe Çevresi, 2019-09-01) Birgül, Mehmet; BİRGÜL, MEHMET FATİH; İlahiyat Fakültesi; Felsefe ve Din Bilimleri Bölümü; 0000-0002-9404-6266; AAG-8525-2021
    In Aristotle's famous work titled Categories, there is an important and critical chapter (1a20-1b25), not only in terms of logic but also in metaphysics. This section, in which the existing ones classified into a quaternary classification, a basic perspective on the nature of ore and symptoms and what is total and less is presented. The most critical point of this classification which Aristotle made on 'being on a subject' and being told 'about a subject', is the determination of which kinds of predicates are obliged to convey to his subject matter and meaning. In this regard, because of the shortness of Aristotle's text and the limited examples are given, different interpretations have emerged since ancient times. Ibn Rushd criticizes the different interpretations of the nature of the information they give about the ores they are loaded, which are very important especially in terms of 'definition theory'. Ibn Rushd, who found that the solution of Farabi on this matter, rightly left the general interpretation of the ancient Sharia, especially criticized the solution of Farabi by considering the interpretation of Ibn Sina and reached the most healthy solution in his way.