Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T22:20:40.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Averroës: Politics and Opinion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Charles E. Butterworth
Charles E. Butterworth*
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Averroës is primarily known for his numerous commentaries on Aristotle, yet his most explicitly political writing was presented in the form of a commentary on Plato's Republic. Consequently, the major dispute in scholarly literature has been whether he was more of a Platonist or an Aristotelian, a dispute of concern only because it reflects the important political question of what Averroës thought about the relation between theory and practice. This essay seeks to answer that question by studying the numerous editions and translations of his writings made available by contemporary scholarship. His commentaries on the logical arts concerned with public speech and common opinion are first examined, and the teaching set forth there is then contrasted with the kind of ideas Averroës expounded in his explicitly public works.

In the commentaries on the logical arts, Averroës stretched Aristotle's arguments in order to suggest that unexamined opinion was an insufficient guide for the practical arts dependent on such opinion. Although Averroës did not claim that such arts could be guided only by theoretical knowledge, he did insist that they could be best used only by those aware of the limits of opinion. This opening for the guidance of philosophy was carried further in the public writings where the need for philosophy to direct sound practice was defended against religiously motivated attacks on philosophy. Thus, the correct understanding of Averroës's views about the relation between theory and practice is closely related to an appreciation of his views about the role peculiar to philosophy and philosophers in his own religious community.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 66 , Issue 3 , September 1972 , pp. 894 - 901
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Plato, Republic 514a–515d, 516c–517e, 520a–521b, 543a–544aCrossRefGoogle Scholar; Politicus 300e; Phaedrus 259e–261c, 262b-c, 270d–271c, 271d272b, 274e–275b, 277b-c; 278b-d. Compare also al-Fārābi Commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric (Cod. Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat. 16097), folios 192vb–193ra, as cited by William F. Boggess) “Alfarabi and the Rhetoric: the Cave Revisited” in Phronesis, 15 (1970), 89Google Scholar.

2 See Aristotle, Politics 1288b10–1289a25Google Scholar (IV. i. 1–6); Nicomachaen Ethics 1094a1–1095a13 (Li–iii), 1180a15–1181b23 (X. ix. 11–23). See also Mahdi, Muhsin, Ibn Khaldūn's Philosophy of History (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1964), pp. 274–275Google Scholar.

3 For the decision to comment on Plato's Republic, see Averroës' Commentary on Plato's Republic, ed. and trans. Rosenthal, E. I. J. (Cambridge: Univ. Press, 1966), p. 112Google Scholar (First Treatise, Chapter 1, Sections 6–8, according to Rosenthal's editing). Averroës made his judgment about the similarity between the book by Plato and that by Aristotle with full knowledge that Aristotle had not perceived such a similarity. Averroës, Compare, Libros Decem Moralium Nicomachiorum Expositio in Aristotelis Opera cum Averrois Commentariis (Venice: Apud Junctas, 1562) Vol. III, folio 160 GGoogle Scholar.

4 Averroës considered Aristotle's Organon to consist of eight books: Categories, De Interpretatione, Prior Analytics, Posterior Analytics, Topics, On Sophistry, Rhetoric, and Poetics. According to him, these eight books present five logical arts: demonstration, dialectic, sophistry, rhetoric, and poetics. The syllogisms proper to the art of demonstration are constructed with apodeictic premises; consequently, when they are correctly constructed, they necessarily lead to certain conclusions. However, the arguments used in the arts of dialectic, rhetoric, and poetics are constructed with premises derived from opinion; consequently, even when they are correctly constructed, they do not necessarily lead to certain conclusions. Because sophistry aims at deceiving only for the selfish gain of the speaker, the logical character of its premises is not an important consideration.

In recent years ‘Badawī, Abd al-Raḥmān has edited the Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric or Talkhīṣ al-Khaṭābah (Cairo: Maktabat al-Nahḍah al-Miṣrīyah, 1960)Google Scholar and the Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Poetics or Talkhīṣ al-Shi'r; the latter work appeared in Aristūtālīs Fann al-Shi 'r (Cairo: Maktabat al-Nahḍah al-Miṣrīyah, 1953)Google Scholar, a volume containing the Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics and editions of short commentaries on the Poetics by al-Fārābi and Avicenna. Salim Salīm has also edited the Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric; see Talkhīṣ al-Khaṭābah, ed. Sālim, Salīm (Cairo: Dār al-Taḥrir li al-Ṭab'wa al-Nashr, 1967)Google Scholar. The Short Commentaries on Aristotle's Topics, Rhetoric, and Poetics, which heretofore could only be consulted in two Judaeo-Arabic manuscripts (Cod. Paris., Bibl. Nat. Or., 1008 and Cod. München., König. Hof. und Staats Bibl. arab., 650a) and in Mediaeval Latin translation, have now been edited and translated into English. They will soon be published under the title Averroës' Three Short Commentaries on Aristotle's Topics, Rhetoric, and Poetics (New York: SUNY Press, 1972)Google Scholar.

5 The Decisive Treatise or Book of the Decisive Treatise and Stipulation of the Relationship between Divine Law and Philosophy and the Epistle Dedicatory have been edited and translated by George F. Hourani; see Kitāb Faṣl al-Maqāl wa Taqrīir mā bayna al-Shari'ah wa al-Ḥikmah min al-Ittiṣāl (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1959)Google Scholar and Averroës on the Harmony of Religion and Philosophy (London: Luzac and Co., 1961)Google Scholar. For the decision to call the Ḍamīmah Epistle Dedictary, see Mahdi, Mushin, “Averroës on Divine Law and Human Wisdom” in Ancients and Moderns, ed. Cropsey, Joseph (New York: Basic Books, 1964), pp. 114–131Google Scholar. The Uncovering of the Clear Paths or The Book of Uncovering the Clear Paths of the Signs about the Beliefs of the Religious Community was recently edited by Maḥmūd Qāṣim; see Kitāb al-Kashf 'an Manāhij al- 'Adillah fi 'Aqā 'id al-Millah, ed. Qāsim, Maḥmūd (Cairo: Maktabat al-Anglū al-Miṣrīyah, 1963)Google Scholar. Simon van den Bergh has translated The Incoherence of the Incoherence from Father Bouyge's earlier edition of the Tahāfut al-Tahāfut; see The Incoherence of the Incoherence, trans. van den Bergh, Simon (London: Luzac and Co., 1954)Google Scholar.

6 References to the Short Commentaries on Aristotle's Topics, Rhetoric, and Poetics are to the paragraphs of the forthcoming edition. Compare Averroës, Short Commentary on Aristotle's Topics, para. 21; Jāmi' Kitāb al-Burhān [Short Commentary on Aristotle's Posterior Analytics]. Cod. Paris., folios 62a15–63a6, Cod. München., folios 56b22–57a24; Talkhiṣ Kitāb mā ba 'da al-Ṭabī 'ah [Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics], ed. 'Amīn, Uthmān (Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī, 1958), pp. 1:10–2.8, 5:12–6:14Google Scholar. Contrast these with Aristotle, Posterior Analytics 77a29–35, 86a22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Averroës, Short Commentary on Aristotle's Topics, paras. 6–8.

8 Averroës, Short Commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric, paras. 2–4, 12, 29, 31, 36, 38, 40, 42–44; Talkhīṣ al-Khaṭābah [Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric], Badawī edition, pp. 3:5–4:4, 20:9–22:9; Short Commentary on Aristotle's Topics, para. 2.

9 Averroës, Short Commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric, para. 45; Talkhīṣ al-Khaṭābah [Middle Commentary … Rhetoric], Badawī edition, pp. 4:5–16, 28:9–29:5.

10 Averroës, , Uncovering of the Clear Paths, pp. 153:5–154:15Google Scholar (pagination of Müller edition is pp. 45–47).

11 Averroës, , Talkhīṣ al-Khaṭābah [Middle Commentary … Rhetoric], Badawī edition, pp. 13:5–15.8Google Scholar.

12 Talkhīṣ al-Khaṭābah [Middle Commentary … Rhetoric], Badawī edition, pp. 10:14–21, 18:10–12.

13 Averroës, Short Commentary on Aristotle's Poetics, paras. 1, 4.

14 Short Commentary … Poetics, paras. 2–3.

15 Short Commentary … Poetics, para. 5.

16 See Averroës, Jāmi'Kitāb al-Burhān [Short Commentary … Posterior Analytics], Cod. Paris., folio 62a6–15, Cod. München., folio 56b1–22 Taṣdīr 'Amm (General Introduction to the Short Commentaries on Aristotle's Organon), Cod. München., folio 1a1–1b17.

17 See Averroës, , Talkhīṣ al-Khaṭābah [Middle Commentary … Rhetoric] Badawī edition, pp. 9:19–10:8, 249:16–20Google Scholar.

18 See Averroës, , Decisive Treatise, pp. 6:15–7:16, 14:18–18:19, 19:10–24:8, 24:14–26:2Google Scholar; Uncovering of the Clear Paths, pp. 150:5–154:15 (Müller pagination is pp. 43–47), 157:6–159:9 (Müller: 48–50), 162:3–9 (Müller: 53), 165:13–167:14 (Müller: 56–57), 173:14–174:2 (Müller: 62–63), 178:10–180:19 (Müller: 67–69), 182:3–185:2 (Müller: 70–73), 193:1–194:17 (Müller: 79–80), 240:1–241:4 (Müller: 118–119), 249:8–251:14 (Müller: 125–127); Incoherence of the Incoherence, pp. 207:3–209:9, 356:7–358–12, 427:9–430:15, 514:9–515:2, 527:2–528:5.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.