How does the fine tuning of the universe point to an intelligent designer?

[Omar del Sur]

because I believe in Quran and Sunnah, not Aristotle.

There's a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to this topic.

Do you really want to go to the masjid on jummah, you listen to the khutbah- and the imam is preaching about Aristotle? You want him to recite a verse from the Quran then use the philosophy of Aristotle to interpret the verse from the Quran?

The scholars waged a battle to protect you from this kind of nonsense. If anything, you should be thanking them. "Thank you, Imam Al-Ghazali, thank you Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah".

No, it's not that the scholars were idiots and barbarians and that's why they didn't want Islam mixed with Greek philosophy. If you want to mix Quran and Sunnah and Aristotle in a blender to create some new frankenreligion- it doesn't make you some intellectual genius, if anything it makes you some kind of misguided person.

The people who were into kalaam stuff, the "Muslim philosophers" people- that's what was going on with them. These were Aristotle superfans mixing Islam with Greek philosophy.

Let me use a modern example- look at the "Muslim feminists," "Muslim liberals," "Islamic socialists" of modern times. The people who were into kalaam, the "Muslim philsophers"- those were like the great, great, great grandparents of those people.

Do you want to discuss the rulings of the sharia and people start bringing up whatever the heck it was that Karl Marx or some liberal professor or some feminist academic said on something? You want to sit down for the jummah khutbah and hear that kind of thing?

Even Muhammad Hijab- I'm not making this up- if you really look into it, his kalaam stuff that he's into really does come from Aristotle. No, you don't need to mix Islam with Aristotle or Karl Marx or whatever philosopher. Stick with Quran and Sunnah on the understanding of the salaaf. Don't get into these weird deviations. The scholars did us all a favor by refuting the "Muslim philosopher" people.

 

[Mantiq_Al-gharb]

I believe in Salafiyyah. In no post of mine do I promote philosophy.

I am the one who said that... Bundasliga was just slandering me... if you read the thread where that quote is from, the whole thread I'm attacking philosophy

What is your definition of "philosophy". Scholars such as Al Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah used aristrolean models of reasoning in their works

 

[Omar del Sur]

This issue gets misconstrued all the time.

The "Muslim philosophers" were people who were way too into Ancient Greek philosophy (particularly Aristotle) and tried to mix Islam with the philosophy of Aristotle. Ibn Taymiyyah, Al-Ghazali and others were right to oppose them. You'd have to be crazy to want to attend the khutbah on jummah and listen to the imam citing Quran, Sunnah and Aristotle.

We have "Muslim philosophers" running around today and they're a menace- "liberal Muslims," "feminist Muslims," and I believe to a lesser extent as I think they're a little less prevalent since the fall of the USSR- "Islamic socialists," "Islamic Marxists," etc.

All these people are the modern-day descendants of the "Muslim philosophers" as they do the same thing- they mix Islam with some outside philosophy. And all they do is push deviancy- with them, it's forget Quran and Sunnah- Islam and Quran and Sunnah as well (according to their approach) need to to conform with liberal ideology... or feminist ideology... or Karl Marx.... or Aristotle, etc.

When the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah combatted the encroachment of philosophy into the dīn, they were combatting stuff like people trying to mix Islam with Aristotle- it has nothing to do with telling people they can't use their brains. Islam promotes reasoning but our reasoning needs to be in line with Quran and Sunnah. The "Muslim philosophers"- they would put what Aristotle said over what Quran and Sunnah said. In modern times, you can look at "liberal Muslims," "feminist Muslims", "Islamic socialists" and you can see the same thing happening.

Revelation came through the prophets. Philosophy is through the philosophers. Plato, Aristotle, Kant, etc.

Islam is already perfect. You are never going to improve Islam. And you will never improve Islam by mixing Islam with Aristotle... or Kant... or Nietzsche... or Hegel... or Confucius.

"Muslim philosophy" is and always has been a menace and the entire agenda behind the narrative being pushed that glorifies it and condemns the fight that was carried out against it... the entire agenda behind this narrative being pushed is to make Muslims more open to Western philosophy and thus to Westernization. Behind the veil of its rhetoric, it's just a plot to Westernize Muslims.

 

[Omar del Sur]

What is your definition of "philosophy". Scholars such as Al Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah used aristrolean models of reasoning in their works

Where specifically did Ibn Taymiyyah incorporate Aristotelianism? I'd like to see the text.

I'll give my definition later insha'Allah.

 

[Omar del Sur]

I outlined my thoughts in this post on how philosophy is defined. I believe it is properly understood in the "body of tradition" sense that I described.

I already explained about philosophy:

"Islam is not an anti-rational decision so i really don't get why people fear philosophy."

oh so Ibn Taymiyyah and those of us who don't want Islam to get mixed with philosophy... we "fear philosophy"... we are philosophyphobes? I think it's funny that you use the same rhetorical gimmick as gay activists but anyways...

"i don't see any problem with mixing philosophy with the religion... Mixing rationality/philosophy with the deen is what got as proofs for God's existence, what to do in the case of apparent conflict between reason and the literal meaning of scripture, etc."

Ok, there is a gimmick that people who try to push this stuff do- which is they try to conflate reason/reasoning with philosophy. It's something like this:

A- "Philosophy just means reason, bro"
B- Islam is not anti-reason
C- Therefore it is acceptable to mix Islam with Aristotle

This actually is the fallacy of non sequitur. This whole line of reasoning is based on playing a game with language.

Anyways, I don't think it's proper to conflate philosophy with reason. The word is Greek and originally was referring specifically to Ancient Greek philosophy.

But for sake of argument, let's say one definition of philosophy is simply identical to "reason".

Ok but philosophy is also used in another sense which refers to a body of tradition- the Western philosophical tradition (Socrates, Kant, etc.) in Western context or figures like Lao Tzu and Confucius if we're talking about Eastern philosophy.

Now for sake of simplicity, let's throw out Eastern philosophy- I don't think anyone here is a Confucian.

If by "philosophy" you just mean reason- there is no objection to reason as long as it is line with Quran and Sunnah. But if what you are referring to would include "the Western philosophical tradition"- there is no way this is acceptable.

If we are having a discussion on how to correctly interpret a verse of the Quran- you think we should refer to Aristotle and Kant? When it comes to sharia we should refer to Nieztsche? That would be absurd.

No way should Islam be mixed with the Western philosophical tradition- do you agree?

 

[Qahwe]

Does god possibly exist? yes, but it doesn’t have to be a certain religion.

 

[Mantiq_Al-gharb]

Where specifically did Ibn Taymiyyah incorporate Aristotelianism? I'd like to see the text.

I'll give my definition later insha'Allah.

Any Islamic scholar that incorporates scholasticism (arguments such as Kalam) is essentially using an aristrolean method of reasoning. I also don't understand what you mean the "western philosophical tradition" - that in it of itself is not an ideaology no?

 

[Omar del Sur]

Any Islamic scholar that incorporates scholasticism (arguments such as Kalam) is essentially using an aristrolean method of reasoning. I also don't understand what you mean the "western philosophical tradition" - that in it of itself is not an ideaology no?

I already explained- "Ok but philosophy is also used in another sense which refers to a body of tradition- the Western philosophical tradition (Socrates, Kant, etc.) in Western context or figures like Lao Tzu and Confucius if we're talking about Eastern philosophy."

It's a body of tradition.

-Plato
-Aristotle
-Kant

etc.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Any Islamic scholar that incorporates scholasticism (arguments such as Kalam) is essentially using an aristrolean method of reasoning. I also don't understand what you mean the "western philosophical tradition" - that in it of itself is not an ideaology no?

ok show the text where Sheikh Ibn Taymiyah uses scholasticism (which is Catholic philosophy btw) or kalaam

 

[Mantiq_Al-gharb]

ok show the text where Sheikh Ibn Taymiyah uses scholasticism (which is Catholic philosophy btw) or kalaam

Scholasticism is the use of formal logic to defend theological propositions. Are you asking me to list every time Ibn Taymiyyah used aspects of formal logic like sylloigsms?