AVERROES
ISLAMIC ARISTOTELIANISM
Averroes (Ibn Rushd) was born in Cordoba, Spain, the
son of a judge, and in addition to philosophy studied law, theology, medicine
and mathematics. He became a judge
himself in Seville and then practised medicine in Spain and later in
Morocco. He wrote on astronomy, medicine
and law but is notable primarily as an eminent and influential commentator on
Aristotle; and indeed in the later medieval period was known as 'The
Commentator'.
RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY/ METAPHYSICS
[1] [See Harmony between
Philosophy and Religion and The
Incoherence of the Incoherence.] In
dealing with the problem of the
relationship of reason to faith Averroes regarded philosophy
and theology as operating at different levels or in different ways. While the philosopher seeks certainty as far
as possible through reason, the theologian's presentation may be only probable. A truth might be
formulated 'scientifically', that is, in philosophy, when it is regarded as
knowledge; while in theology it is understood allegorically. According to Averroes, conflicts over Muslim
orthodoxy arose because disputants failed to recognise the fundamental irreconcilability of some
religious doctrines with what is philosophically demonstrable. The non-philosopher accepts faith on
authority: but Averroes rejected the primacy of faith over reason [a].
[2] [See Commentaries on Aristotle especially Physics and Metaphysics.] In his metaphysics Averroes emphasized the individual existent thing and argued that existence
can not be separated from either essence or accidents and is the primary notion [a]. To be an essential substance is to exist. Indeed, everything that has being exists, especially God. 'Being' thus seems to have been
used as a univocal term, that is, one which has the same meaning whether
referring to the categories of substance or accidents though the meaning might be said also
to be analogous by virtue of the common 'possession' of existence [b]. Averroes distinguished between necessity and possibility (or potentiality). For him necessity belongs to being as such and does not refer to
any necessary connection between 'contingent' beings and their causes. Rather beings are
potential to the extent that they are not fully actualized and are dependent on
some other being for their existence [c]. God as pure Act is pure
Form, the unmoved mover, identical with
the First Intelligence, and both final uncaused cause and efficient creative
cause [d] the 'world force' (natura
naturans) [d]. He produces the world out of
necessity because He knows it and this can be proved philosophically [e]. At the other extreme is pure potentiality prime
matter, uncreated and coeternal with God [f]. Between the two is Nature as a unified, single
structure (natura naturata) [g], containing bodies in a
hierarchical process from potentiality (matter) to actuality (form) which
makes each individual what it is [g]. This does not emanate from God: rather He creates, actualizes the
celestial spheres and the other Intelligences (which are pure act) in the
hierarchy as intermediate causes [g]. Through these God passes down His power to the last Intelligence, the
Active Intellect, which converts potential being (matter) into actual
being rather than bringing forms into
the created world [h].
KNOWLEDGE/ PSYCHOLOGY
[3] [Commentaries on Aristotle especially De Anima.] Knowledge is essentially a
knowledge of Being at its various levels as studied by natural
science, natural philosophy, metaphysics
which is concerned with being as such, and culminating in a mystical
knowledge of ultimate reality [a]. Averroes distinguishes between the universal active intellect
and a corporeal passive intellect or understanding [b]. This is, however, distinct from the soul and is a capacity to receive
forms [b].
He utilizes this distinction in his account of how knowledge is gained. When 'illuminated' by the active
intellect the passive intellect becomes the non-corporeal material intellect
and a property of the active intellect itself the two together constituting
the 'acquired' intellect and initiating the thinking and knowing process which
involves the 'abstracting' of the intelligible forms from material things [c]. The individual soul as such is not a so-called 'possible' soul but
'sensitive', the form of the body
(corporeal form), and perishes with it [d]. The acquired intellect, however, is separable from matter. Survival after
death is therefore possible. But this is not a personal
immortality, as the separated forms or substances do not exist as individuals
but rather subsist as aspects in the common active human intellect of the human
species within the universal hierarchy of being. He thus espoused the doctrine of monopsychism [e].
CRITICAL SUMMARY
Although influenced by some
Neoplatonic methods and metaphysics, Averroes was essentially Aristotelian
but not uncritically so; and he is important for this greater emphasis on Aristotle
as against the Neoplatonic bias of earlier Islamic thought. He also sought to make philosophy more
independent of religious presuppositions while denying any incompatibility
between them. The inseparability of
essence and existence; necessity and possibility as an intrinsic feature of
beings; God as creative unmoved mover and first cause; and restoration of the
form-act, matter-potential distinction these are all significant claims in
his thought. His writings were condemned
by the Christian Church, but they were avidly studied by major philosophers
before the ban was lifted in the mid-thirteenth century, and were influential
on the 'Latin Averroests' (as their opponents called them). Nevertheless, aspects of his philosophy, such
as his affirmation of one universal active intellect and his rejection of
personal immortality were later criticized by Christian thinkers.
CONNECTIONS
Averroes