What do you think?
Rate this book
Interpreting Averroes: Critical Essays
This volume brings together world-leading scholars on the thought of Averroes, the greatest medieval commentator on Aristotle but also a major scholar of Islam. The collection situates him in his historical context by emphasizing the way that he responded to the political situation of twelfth-century Islamic Spain and the provocations of Islamic theology. It also sheds light on the interconnections between aspects of his work that are usually studied separately, such as his treatises on logic and his legal writings. Advanced students and scholars will find authoritative and insightful treatments of Averroes' philosophy, tackled from multiple perspectives and written in a clear and accessible way that will appeal to those encountering his work for the first time as well as to anyone looking for new critical approaches to Averroes and his thinking.
- GenresPhilosophy
270 pages, Hardcover
Published January 31, 2019
1 person is currently reading
64 people want to read
About the author
Peter S. Adamson
30 books124 followersPeter Scott Adamson is an American academic who is professor of philosophy in late antiquity and in the Islamic world at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich as well as professor of ancient and medieval philosophy at Kings College London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 9, 2021
Averroes was hailed by none other than Aquinas as the ‘Commentator’; the most ardent proponent of the works of Aristotle, his peers however, would be justified in calling him the ‘Dissenter.’ For Averroes was a fierce critic of Avicenna and the legendary Ghazali and spent what could be argued as an unjustifiable amount of time debasing the ideas of the two theological titans.
In the 12th century, the Islamic west had gained a level of centrality due to the impact of the Crusades and sectarian fissures which were rife in the Islamic east. Muslim Spain (Averroes birthplace) was enjoying an intellectual efflorescence and as such scholars were privy to patronage. Averroes was born into the Almohad Empire whose approach to society was riddled with ambiguity; on one hand they were quite happy to patronise Islamic and Jewish philosophers, but they also persecuted religious minorities culminating in a siege mentality which made the Muslims suspicious of Jews and Christians.
The provenance of Averroes education stemmed from the range of books and treatises translated from the Greek scholars. Aristotle being the most prominent scholar upon whose voluminous works they based their own theories. Strangely, Averroes and his contemporaries did not seem to have that deep an insight into the works of Plato.
Averroes contribution to Islamic Philosophy stems not so much from the originality of his insight- in fact it can be argued that Avicenna was the more original thinker- but from the clarity of his translations of Aristotle’s works. To understand the impact of Aristotle on Averroes you have to take into account the intellectual milieu of scholastic life at that time; you had the literalists who were for the most part lawyers who did not deviate from the Holy text and the theologians who had a more elaborate view of theology. The Aristotlean Philosophers often played the part of mediators between the two fractious groups- usually at the behest of the Caliph, and so they regarded themselves as elite intellectuals and had an infallible belief in the veracity of their interpretations of the Quran. It was against this sense of entitlement that Al Ghazali rallied against much to the consternation of Averroes who was the champion of the Aristotlean Philosophers.
Averroes was a passionate proponent of the notion that philosophical argument or dialectical argument was the only technique you could use to unravel the meaning of the Quran. Consequently, only the Philosophers had demonstrative proof of Quranic truths using methods logic and syllogism which they had imbibed in their study of Greek philosophers.
Despite the self-professed acuity of his opinions; some of Aristotle’s views do seem to be at variance to the teachings of the Quran. He firmly believed that the world had always existed: there was never a beginning of the world or the beginning to time. His other controversial doctrine was that of immortality, he believed upon death you did not go to the Garden but instead became a disembodied intellect. Yet this disembodied intellect was not unique to the person but instead belonged to the ‘Universal Intellect’. This Universal Intellect being analogous to the internet; for Averrroes, the human imagination as akin to a ‘Google’ type browser and when you died all that remained was this single intellectual mind. Ideas that seem more rooted in the works of Aristotle than in the Quran: an unusual position for any Muslim Philosopher.
Averroes stated that when your mind grasped an idea your mind became the idea. So individual ideation for him did not exist. Such heterodox theories seemed irreligious to the Jurists who were responsible for his subsequent exile.
Averroes dissent derived not so much from any intellectual conceit but more from a characteristic of scholastic philosophy which favoured an adversarial approach; you stated two contrasting positions and then you tried to find out through dialectical means which is the one to follow. The problem with such an approach is that it focuses on particulars as opposed to fundamentals and consequently deviates from the most sensible solution. This was I believe the problem underpinning Averroes’s use of Qiyas: he drowned himself in the wording.
Ironically, the novelties of Avicenna to which Averroes was so vehemently opposed to – such as the meaning of God’s essence and distinction- became the dominant problems and themes of post-Classical Islamic philosophy.
The adherence to Aristotle’s way of thinking enervated a lot of Averroes ideas. Especially regarding mysticism; for him mystical intuition was not worthy of consideration for the simple reason that knowledge that could not be gained through deductive or empirical means was the sign of a defective mind.
A dogmatic mentality that perhaps robbed him of the acclaim he might have enjoyed.
In the 12th century, the Islamic west had gained a level of centrality due to the impact of the Crusades and sectarian fissures which were rife in the Islamic east. Muslim Spain (Averroes birthplace) was enjoying an intellectual efflorescence and as such scholars were privy to patronage. Averroes was born into the Almohad Empire whose approach to society was riddled with ambiguity; on one hand they were quite happy to patronise Islamic and Jewish philosophers, but they also persecuted religious minorities culminating in a siege mentality which made the Muslims suspicious of Jews and Christians.
The provenance of Averroes education stemmed from the range of books and treatises translated from the Greek scholars. Aristotle being the most prominent scholar upon whose voluminous works they based their own theories. Strangely, Averroes and his contemporaries did not seem to have that deep an insight into the works of Plato.
Averroes contribution to Islamic Philosophy stems not so much from the originality of his insight- in fact it can be argued that Avicenna was the more original thinker- but from the clarity of his translations of Aristotle’s works. To understand the impact of Aristotle on Averroes you have to take into account the intellectual milieu of scholastic life at that time; you had the literalists who were for the most part lawyers who did not deviate from the Holy text and the theologians who had a more elaborate view of theology. The Aristotlean Philosophers often played the part of mediators between the two fractious groups- usually at the behest of the Caliph, and so they regarded themselves as elite intellectuals and had an infallible belief in the veracity of their interpretations of the Quran. It was against this sense of entitlement that Al Ghazali rallied against much to the consternation of Averroes who was the champion of the Aristotlean Philosophers.
Averroes was a passionate proponent of the notion that philosophical argument or dialectical argument was the only technique you could use to unravel the meaning of the Quran. Consequently, only the Philosophers had demonstrative proof of Quranic truths using methods logic and syllogism which they had imbibed in their study of Greek philosophers.
Despite the self-professed acuity of his opinions; some of Aristotle’s views do seem to be at variance to the teachings of the Quran. He firmly believed that the world had always existed: there was never a beginning of the world or the beginning to time. His other controversial doctrine was that of immortality, he believed upon death you did not go to the Garden but instead became a disembodied intellect. Yet this disembodied intellect was not unique to the person but instead belonged to the ‘Universal Intellect’. This Universal Intellect being analogous to the internet; for Averrroes, the human imagination as akin to a ‘Google’ type browser and when you died all that remained was this single intellectual mind. Ideas that seem more rooted in the works of Aristotle than in the Quran: an unusual position for any Muslim Philosopher.
Averroes stated that when your mind grasped an idea your mind became the idea. So individual ideation for him did not exist. Such heterodox theories seemed irreligious to the Jurists who were responsible for his subsequent exile.
Averroes dissent derived not so much from any intellectual conceit but more from a characteristic of scholastic philosophy which favoured an adversarial approach; you stated two contrasting positions and then you tried to find out through dialectical means which is the one to follow. The problem with such an approach is that it focuses on particulars as opposed to fundamentals and consequently deviates from the most sensible solution. This was I believe the problem underpinning Averroes’s use of Qiyas: he drowned himself in the wording.
Ironically, the novelties of Avicenna to which Averroes was so vehemently opposed to – such as the meaning of God’s essence and distinction- became the dominant problems and themes of post-Classical Islamic philosophy.
The adherence to Aristotle’s way of thinking enervated a lot of Averroes ideas. Especially regarding mysticism; for him mystical intuition was not worthy of consideration for the simple reason that knowledge that could not be gained through deductive or empirical means was the sign of a defective mind.
A dogmatic mentality that perhaps robbed him of the acclaim he might have enjoyed.
Displaying 1 of 1 review