Awerroes
Filozofia i religia nie mogą sobie przeczyć, bo prawda jest jedna – a sam Koran nakazuje ludziom używać rozumu.
Umiejscowienie
Sędzia i lekarz w Kordobie i Sewilli, który skomentował niemal całego Arystotelesa: bronił filozofii przeciw al-Ghazalemu i dowodził, że sam Koran nakazuje rozumowanie dowodowe tym, którzy są w stanie je uprawiać; w łacińskiej Europie stał się po prostu „Komentatorem”.
Kluczowe idee
- Jedność intelektu
- Harmonia filozofii i objawienia
Wpływ
Pod wpływem 5
Platon
pod wpływem ✓
Lacking Aristotle’s Politics, Averroes commented on Plato’s Republic (c. 1194), applying its account of degenerating regimes to the states of his own time. Averroes, Commentary on Plato’s Republic, tr. R. Lerner, Averroes on Plato’s Republic (1974); SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Platon › 428–348 p.n.e.
Arystoteles
pod wpływem ✓
Averroes commented on almost all of Aristotle’s works, in short, middle and long commentaries, seeking to recover Aristotle’s own doctrine from later Neoplatonic additions. SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”; H. A. Davidson, Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes, on Intellect (1992)
Arystoteles › 384–322 p.n.e.
Al-Farabi
pod wpływem ✓
Averroes took up al-Farabi’s view that demonstrative, dialectical and rhetorical arguments suit different audiences, arguing that philosophy and the revealed law agree (Decisive Treatise, c. 1179). Ibn Rushd, Fasl al-maqal (c. 1179), tr. C. E. Butterworth, The Book of the Decisive Treatise (2001); SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”; SEP “al-Farabi”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Al-Farabi › ok. 872–950
Avempace
pod wpływem ✓
Averroes took up Ibn Bajja’s account of the intellect’s conjunction with the Active Intellect and discussed his views on motion in the void in his Physics commentary. Ibn Rushd, Long Commentary on the Physics; Long Commentary on De anima; SEP “Ibn Bajja [Avempace]”
Avempace › ok. 1085–1138
Ibn Tufajl
pod wpływem ✓
According to Averroes’ own account, preserved by al-Marrakushi, Ibn Tufayl introduced him to the caliph Abu Yaqub Yusuf and prompted his commentaries on Aristotle. al-Marrakushi, al-Mujib (1224); L. E. Goodman, Ibn Tufayl’s Hayy Ibn Yaqzan (1972), introduction; SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Ibn Tufajl › ok. 1105–1185
Wpływ na 8
Albert Wielki
wpływ na
Albert used Averroes’ commentaries throughout his Aristotle paraphrases, while rejecting his single intellect for all humans (De unitate intellectus contra Averroem, 1256). Albertus Magnus, De unitate intellectus contra Averroem (1256); SEP “Albert the Great”
Źródło: szkic AI
Albert Wielki › ok. 1200–1280
Siger z Brabancji
wpływ na ✓
Siger followed Averroes in reading Aristotle as teaching a single intellect shared by all humans (Questions on De anima III, late 1260s) and later qualified this view. Siger of Brabant, Quaestiones in tertium De anima; De anima intellectiva (c. 1273); SEP “Siger of Brabant”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Siger z Brabancji › ok. 1240–1284
Gersonides
wpływ na
Gersonides wrote supercommentaries on the Hebrew versions of many of Averroes’ commentaries on Aristotle, mostly in the early 1320s, and discussed his theory of the intellect. SEP “Gersonides”; SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”
Źródło: szkic AI
Gersonides › 1288–1344
Ibn Chaldun
wpływ na ✓
According to his contemporary and friend Ibn al-Khatib, the young Ibn Khaldun wrote several summaries of works by Averroes, besides books on logic and arithmetic. Ibn al-Khatib, al-Ihata fi akhbar Gharnata (notice on Ibn Khaldun); F. Rosenthal, introduction to Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah (1958)
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Ibn Chaldun › 1332–1406
Giovanni Pico della Mirandola
wpływ na
Pico studied Averroes in Padua with Elia del Medigo, who prepared texts for him, and included forty-one theses ‘according to Averroes’ in his 900 Conclusions (1486). G. Pico della Mirandola, Conclusiones (1486); G. Licata, Secundum Avenroem: Pico della Mirandola, Elia del Medigo e la «seconda rivelazione» di Averroè (2022)
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
Giovanni Pico della Mirandola › 1463–1494
Mohammed Abed al-Jabri
wpływ na
Al-Jabri took Averroes as the model of the demonstrative rationalism of the Muslim West and called for its revival in contemporary Arab thought (We and the Heritage, 1980). M. A. al-Jabri, Nahnu wa-l-turath (1980); Arab-Islamic Philosophy: A Contemporary Critique, tr. A. Abbassi (1999)
Źródło: szkic AI
Mohammed Abed al-Jabri › 1935–2010
Pokaż wszystko (8)Pokaż mniej
Roger Bacon
wpływ na
Bacon used Averroes’ commentaries in his Paris lectures on Aristotle in the 1240s and cited him as an authority in the Opus maius (1267). Roger Bacon, Quaestiones supra libros Physicorum; Opus maius (1267); SEP “Roger Bacon”
Źródło: szkic AI
Roger Bacon › ok. 1219–1292
Marsyliusz z Padwy
wpływ na sporne
Older research called Marsilius’ separation of political reason from faith ‘Averroist’; whether the Defensor pacis (1324) draws on Averroes himself is disputed. Marsilius of Padua, Defensor pacis (1324); A. Gewirth, Marsilius of Padua and Medieval Political Philosophy (1951)
Źródło: szkic AI
Marsyliusz z Padwy › ok. 1275–1342
Krytyka
Krytyka ze strony 4
Święty Bonawentura
krytyka ze strony
Bonaventure attacked the Averroist teaching of a single intellect for all humans, which in his view abolished personal immortality and responsibility (Collationes de decem praeceptis, 1267). Bonaventure, Collationes de decem praeceptis II (1267); Collationes in Hexaemeron VI (1273); SEP “Saint Bonaventure”
Źródło: szkic AI
Święty Bonawentura › ok. 1221–1274
Tomasz z Akwinu wpływ na
wpływ na ✓
Aquinas used Averroes as ‘the Commentator’ throughout his Aristotle commentaries, even while writing against his single intellect for all humans. Thomas Aquinas, Sentencia libri De anima; In Metaphysicam; C. Burnett, ‘Arabic into Latin’, in P. Adamson / R. C. Taylor (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy (2005); SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
krytyka ze strony
Aquinas argued that Averroes’ single intellect for all humans contradicts both Aristotle and the experience that it is the individual human being who thinks (De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas, 1270). Thomas Aquinas, De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas (1270); Summa theologiae I q. 76 a. 2
Źródło: szkic AI
Tomasz z Akwinu › ok. 1225–1274
Pietro Pomponazzi
krytyka ze strony
Pomponazzi rejected Averroes’ single intellect for all humans as contrary to Aristotle and to experience, concluding that natural reason shows the soul to be mortal (1516). P. Pomponazzi, Tractatus de immortalitate animae (1516); SEP “Pietro Pomponazzi”
Źródło: szkic AI
Pietro Pomponazzi › 1462–1525
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
krytyka ze strony
Leibniz rejected the Averroist doctrine of a single intellect shared by all human beings in his “Considerations on the Doctrine of a Single Universal Spirit” (1702) and in the Preliminary Discourse of the Theodicy (1710). Leibniz, Considérations sur la doctrine d’un esprit universel unique (1702); Essais de Théodicée (1710), Discours préliminaire
Źródło: szkic AI
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz › 1646–1716
Krytykuje 3
Abu al-Hasan al-Aszari
krytykuje
Averroes rejected the Asharite proof of God from the createdness of atoms and accidents, and their denial of natural causes, as unsound (al-Kashf an manahij al-adilla, 1179). Ibn Rushd, al-Kashf ʿan manāhij al-adilla (1179); SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”
Źródło: szkic AI
Abu al-Hasan al-Aszari › ok. 874–936
Awicenna
krytykuje
Averroes faulted Avicenna for making existence an accident added to essence and for departing from Aristotle in concessions to the theologians (Tahafut al-tahafut). Ibn Rushd, Tahāfut al-tahāfut; Long Commentary on the Metaphysics; SEP “Ibn Rushd [Averroes]”
Źródło: szkic AI
Awicenna › 980–1037
Al-Ghazali
krytykuje
Averroes answered al-Ghazali’s Incoherence point by point: whoever denies natural causes denies the intellect, since knowledge is knowledge through causes (Tahafut al-tahafut, c. 1180). Ibn Rushd, Tahāfut al-tahāfut, 17th discussion, tr. S. van den Bergh, 1954
Źródło: szkic AI
Al-Ghazali › 1058–1111
Dzieła
Opinia prawna o filozofii: sam Koran nakazuje rozumowanie dowodowe tym, którzy potrafią je uprawiać, a tam, gdzie dowód i dosłowny sens Pisma się kłócą, Pismo należy interpretować.
- ok. 1180Niespójność niespójności
Obrona filozofii przeciw al-Ghazalemu punkt po punkcie.
Komentarze do Arystotelesa linijka po linijce; wiele z nich przetrwało tylko w przekładzie hebrajskim lub łacińskim, za którego pośrednictwem ukształtowały żydowski i łaciński arystotelizm.
Stanowisko
Averroes wanted to recover the true Aristotle from the Neoplatonic additions of his predecessors. In the Decisive Treatise he argued that the Qur’an itself commands philosophical reflection, and that where scripture seems to conflict with demonstration it must be read allegorically – truth cannot contradict truth. In The Incoherence of the Incoherence he defended philosophy point by point against al-Ghazali. His most controversial thesis held that there is only one material intellect for all humankind. Translated into Latin and Hebrew, his commentaries made him simply “the Commentator” in Europe and gave rise to Latin Averroism, against which Aquinas wrote.
Życie i kontekst
Ibn Rushd was born in 1126 in Córdoba into a family of judges and served as a judge in Seville and Córdoba and as court physician to the Almohad caliphs. Encouraged by the caliph Abu Yaqub Yusuf, he wrote commentaries on almost all of Aristotle. Late in life he briefly fell from favour and was banished; he died in Marrakesh in 1198.
Dalsze główne dzieła
- The Decisive Treatise (c. 1179)
- The Incoherence of the Incoherence (c. 1180)
- Long Commentaries on Aristotle (c. 1186–1190)
- The Distinguished Jurist’s Primer (c. 1188)
Pojawia się w
- Podróż „Podróż Arystotelesa” · Przystanek 6 z 9
- Podróż „Od Bagdadu do Isfahanu” · Przystanek 5 z 9
- Debata „Al-Ghazali i Awerroes: czy filozofia może dowieść tego, co twierdzi?”
Stan na listopad 2026 · Źródła · Ulepsz tę stronę · Jak powstaje Agora