14.02.2021 Views

Tahafut_al-Tahafut-transl-Engl-van-den-Bergh

a book on philosophy

a book on philosophy

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

I say:

The answer is: Do you recognize the impossibility of

connecting the eternal Will with the temporal production of

anything, through the necessity of intuitive thought or

through a logical deduction, or-to use your own logical

terminology-do you recognize the clash between these two

concepts through a middle term or without a middle term? If

you claim a middle term-and this is the deductive methodyou

will have to produce it, and if you assert that you know

this through the necessity of thought, why do your

adversaries not share this intuition with you? For the party

which believes in the creation of the world in time through an

eternal Will includes so many persons that no country can

contain them and no number enumerate them, and they

certainly do not contradict the logically minded out of

obstinacy, while knowing better in their hearts. A proof

according to the rules of logic must be produced to show this

impossibility, as in all your arguments up till now there is only

a presumption of impossibility and a comparison with our

decision and our will; and this is false, for the eternal Will

does not resemble temporal volitions, and a pure

presumption of impossibility will not suffice without proof.

This argument is one of those which have only a very feeble persuasive

power. It amounts to saying that one who claims the impossibility of delay

in an effect, when its cause with all its conditions is realized, must assert

that he knows this either by a syllogism or from first principles; if through a

syllogism, he must produce it-but there is none; if from first principles, it

must be known to all, adversaries and others alike. But this argument is

mistaken, for it is not a condition of objective truth that it should be known

to all. That anything should be held by all does not imply anything more

than its being a common notion, just as the existence of a common notion

does not imply objective truth.

Ghazali answers on behalf of the Ash’arites:

If it is said, ‘We know by the necessity of thought that,

when all its conditions are fulfilled, a cause without effect is

40

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!