AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE OF AQUINAS'S NECESSITY AND CONTINGENCY ARGUMENT

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

REZAEIRAH TAYYIBEH; REZAEIRAH MUHAMMAD JAVAD

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Download Full-Text

Persian Verion

View:

627

Download:

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE OF AQUINAS'S NECESSITY AND CONTINGENCY ARGUMENT

Author(s)

REZAEIRAH TAYYIBEH | REZAEIRAH MUHAMMAD JAVAD | Issue Writer Certificate

Keywords

AQUINASQ2

CONTINGENCY ARGUMENTQ1

ESSENTIAL CONTINGENCYQ1

POTENTIAL CONTINGENCYQ1

NECESSARY EXISTENTQ1

IMPOSSIBILITY OF INFINITE CONTINUITYQ1

Abstract

AQUINAS- in contrast to the explanation given by great commentators like Étienne Gilson - has neither made any corrections to Avicenna and Averroes' Necessity and CONTINGENCY ARGUMENT and nor does he essentially have an awareness of their points of difference. The contingency that Avicenna intends in the Argument of Necessity and Contingency, is ESSENTIAL CONTINGENCY; but the contingency intended by Averroes is POTENTIAL CONTINGENCY and necessity according to him is also not necessarily Avicenna's essential necessary being. AQUINAS did not pay attention to this point, which is why he could not even enter into conscious discussion in regards to their differences and make a correct judgment or at least consciously advocate one of the two. His first exposition is an amateurish combination of Avicenna and Averroes' expositions which denotes his lack of mastery over the philosophical foundations of Avicenna and Averroes. In his second exposition, according to one interpretation of it, the same problem applies; in addition to them being suppositions, he has also made mistakes. Anyways, being influenced by Averroes, he has formed his arguments in a two-phase form without knowing that Averroes had reason to do so. The focus of the natural causes and effects in this argument and the applicability of the IMPOSSIBILITY OF INFINITE CONTINUITY is one of the other problems of this exposition.

Cites

No record.

References

No record.

Cite

APA: Copy

REZAEIRAH, TAYYIBEH, & REZAEIRAH, MUHAMMAD JAVAD. (2018). AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE OF AQUINAS'S NECESSITY AND CONTINGENCY ARGUMENT. JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 20(2 (76) ), 119-140. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/98347/en

Vancouver: Copy

REZAEIRAH TAYYIBEH, REZAEIRAH MUHAMMAD JAVAD. AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE OF AQUINAS'S NECESSITY AND CONTINGENCY ARGUMENT. JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH[Internet]. 2018;20(2 (76) ):119-140. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/98347/en

IEEE: Copy

TAYYIBEH REZAEIRAH, and MUHAMMAD JAVAD REZAEIRAH, “AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE OF AQUINAS'S NECESSITY AND CONTINGENCY ARGUMENT,” JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, vol. 20, no. 2 (76) , pp. 119–140, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/98347/en

Related Journal Papers