Al Farabi-Plato - summative essay PDF

Preview

Summary

summative essay...

Description

Comparison between Al Farabi’s “Perfect State” and Plato’s “Republic” One of the pillars behind the influence of historical epochs is the capability of a prevailing entity to develop and sustain scientific, moral and political schemes. Assessing the outcome of a civilization provides insight into its philosophical background, whose effects continue to persist even after the end of a certain epoch. By following its historical timeline, it is easy to observe that Islam founded its own philosophic system that has played a role in the continuity of its values throughout ages. In fact, observing Islam’s development on the level of demographic expansion and political influence hints at the concrete structure of the Islamic philosophy, including its different arrays, which ensures the continuity and sustainability of the effects of this philosophy on the life of individuals and groups. However, questioning the origins of Islamic philosophy remains a debatable topic among scholars and researchers due to the similarities between Islamic philosophy and the prevailing models of previous civilizations. For the majority of Islamic intellectuals, the philosophy behind Islam stems from the metaphysical (divine) source as well as from sociological and historical accumulations. On the other hand, other researchers argue that the core of Islamic philosophy is mostly a restatement of previous philosophies, but in a different social and historical context. This difference in perspectives fuels another debate regarding the assessment of philosophy in Islam as part of its solid religious origins, or the understanding of Islamic philosophy in terms of the social and cultural framework through which it prevailed. A prominent connection is made between Islamic and Greek philosophies due to the common values and norms shared among the two. The following paper aims at tackling the question of comparing Islamic philosophy to Greek philosophy through two renowned figures from each era: Al Farabi and Plato. Between Al Farabi’s “The Perfect State” and Plato’s “The Republic” lies a set of shared philosophical and

political perceptions regarding happiness, governance and social development, yet differences between the two philosophers hint to the effective role of the social and cultural differences in shaping the mode of continuity of civilizations. Al Farabi’s Perfect State Abu Nasr Muhammad Al Farabi is widely recognized as one of the founders of Islamic philosophy due to his works in logic, sciences and metaphysics, yet his major contribution to Islamic philosophy is known in his book “The Perfect State”. To begin with, it is essential to note that Al Farabi’s philosophy is based on the Islamic beliefs on ultimate truth and the relation between the divine and humans. Therefore, Al Farabi believes in a unique creator of the universe and life, and that Prophet Muhammad is the Messenger of God and the exposer of his message to humans. In other words, Al Farabi believes that truth in life is ultimate and precedent to human observation and explanation. Moreover, this ultimate truth embeds a set of eternal values and morals, which humans are supposed to pursue in order to achieve happiness and well-being. ‘Happiness’ as a theoretical concept in Islam includes a range of interpretations, yet all sides agree on defining happiness beyond the sensory world. Similarly, Al Farabi defines happiness in as a two-dimensional state of being. The first dimension of happiness is attained in the after-life after humans are judged upon their actions and intentions during their lifetime. The after-life state of happiness is eternal and cannot be attained in this life, and therefore this dimension refers to individual well-being and the “knowledge of God”. Furthermore, the second dimension of happiness, according to Al-Farabi, is attained among a group of individuals through the “perfect state”. In fact, Al Farabi explains that true happiness is the ultimate goal of the perfect state, and both concepts will be explained in the following paragraph.

Al Farabi’s works have covered a wide range of topics in the science of language, logic, physics, mathematics and metaphysics. However, his major contribution occurred in merging philosophy with political theories of governance and social dynamics. The perfect state according to AlFarabi is the one that is ruled by the virtuous, and whose aims are focused on attaining “true” happiness through virtue. Al Farabi differentiates between “true happiness” and ignorant happiness, which revolves around accumulating wealth and other “temporary” sensory pleasures. Similar to his definition of individual happiness, Al Farabi states that “true happiness” in a state is achieved through virtues, and thus achieving happiness for the largest possible portion of individuals within the state is the “true” path for happiness rather than accumulating wealth and gaining power. Influenced by Aristotle’s correlation between the happiness of the group and the ideality of the state, Al-Farabi defines the structure of the “Virtuous City” in a hierarchical manner that fluctuates between Plato’s pyramid and Aristotle’s dynamics. Al Farabi builds upon the biological model to define his hierarchical structure of the Virtuous City, where the controlling organ (the brain or the “heart” in Al-Farabi’s terms) is positioned at the top, and as the distance between an organ and the control center increases, the organ becomes more of an executor rather than a decision-maker. Al-Farabi believes that the Virtuous City is governed by a virtuous ruler, who claims the highest levels of knowledge in philosophy, sciences, metaphysics and power governance. This ruler, or the Imam, must claim at least six out of twelve properties that include the love for truth and justice, healthy cognitive and physical conditions, wisdom and eloquence. (Islam, 2013) Based on these qualifications, the ruler will be able to identify and serve the virtues that will ensure achieving happiness among the society. The Imam possesses natural wisdom and intellectual health, but he is endowed to learn and develop other intellectual, physical and moral

aspects of one’s character. However, Al-Farabi differentiated between the “Virtuous City” and the “Ideal Virtuous City”, since the latter is governed by the Prophet, who holds all twelve properties and claims his knowledge and virtues through revelation rather than teaching. Al Farabi accepts that this ideal state cannot be achieved due to his Islamic belief in Prophet Muhammad as the last messenger sent from God, yet he explains that the Virtuous City is attainable when highly knowledgeable philosophers claim power. In a virtuous state, all men are virtuous and capable of achieving happiness by abiding to their functions within the general outline set by the ruler. On the other hand, cities that are not ruled by virtue are motivated by “ignorant happiness”, and Al-Farabi defined three types of non-virtuous cities: ignorant cities, immoral cities and erring cities. Due to the continuity of culture through history, it is natural to observe the influence of ancient philosophers such as Plato, and this influence is present in the structural similarities between Plato’s “Ideal State” and Al-Farabi’s “Virtuous City”, in addition to the end goals for both models. To begin with, Plato and Al-Farabi share a common definition of happiness. For Plato, the state of happiness is achieved through abiding to virtues and serving the “common good” of the society, whereas false happiness is manifested in following one’s desires and individualistic tendencies for power and wealth. The core of both models is built upon the belief in the need for a hierarchical structure of governance in the state and the society. In his famous book “The Republic”, Plato aims at defining justice on the level of the society and the individual. Plato founds his model on the exclusivity of aptitudes among individuals in a society, where each individual is encouraged to abide to one’s natural aptitude (talent), and mixing up roles with aptitudes affects the outcome of the state and the level of happiness of the individual and the state. On state level, a just state is attained when governance is exclusive for philosophers-kings.

A philosopher-king is the individual who claims the highest ranking of knowledge, wisdom, governance skills and physical power. According to Plato, brilliant children must undergo teaching and training on the intellectual and physical levels in order to be eligible for governance. The philosopher-king practices power out of necessity (due to his aptitude) rather than desire. That is, beyond serving the common good of the state, a philosopher-king must have no tendencies towards wealth or authority. Therefore, it is safe to note the similarity between Al Farabi’s “Imam” and Plato’s “Philosopher-King” on the level of characteristics and the methodology of training. Furthermore, Plato explains that respecting the aptitude of each social group in the hierarchy is the key to achieving justice, which is adopted in Al-Farabi’s model as well. Finally, both Plato and Al-Farabi shed light on non-ideal versions of the state, where Plato defines four types: oligarchic, timocratic, despotic and democratic. In an identical manner, AlFarabi defines the ignorant, vile, timocratic and despotic states as forms of non-ideal states that arise out of pursuing “false happiness”. Despite the similarities in defining happiness and structuring the ideal state, Plato and Al-Farabi diverge on issues related to society and religion. First of all, Plato’s definition of the social sections in the state “pyramid” is exclusive for what was known in Ancient Greece as “the free people”, which is a social class that does not include slaves. Therefore, Plato’s perceptions on happiness and justice were exclusive for one social class, while he perceived slaves and women as “properties of the state”. On the other hand, Al-Farabi reflects the Islamic belief that came to denounce slavery and does not recognize women as “properties”, despite the controversy regarding the effect of Islamic measures on women. Therefore, the two philosophers diverge on their perception of women and “slaves” inside the state. Another major difference between Plato and Al-Farabi occurs on defining who can achieve happiness. Despite agreeing on the principle

of happiness, Plato argues that only philosophers-kings are capable of reaching the state of ultimate happiness since they are the only ones that can achieve theoretical and practical knowledge simultaneously; thus individuals living in the ideal state are not necessarily happy. However, Al-Farabi argues that all men living in the “Virtuous City” are necessarily happy because they are attaining and practicing virtue, which, according to Al-Farabi, is the path towards true happiness. In addition to that, Al-Farabi diverges from Plato’s description of the ruler by submitting to the superiority of the Prophet among people. Plato believes that philosophers are the sole group in the society who are able to acquire knowledge beyond their boundaries, and this makes them eligible for leading the society. To explain the role of philosophers, Plato provides his famous “Allegory of the Cave” where the philosopher is the only individual who is able to “escape” the distorted reality of the dark cave and have insight to the actual world under the “sun”, which represents ultimate truth. Having seen that the truth, this philosopher becomes obliged to return to the cave and explain it to the stuck individuals. In other words, the role of the philosopher is to convince people that a tree is green, while they have no clue what green is! Even though Al-Farabi agrees that philosophers should be the leaders of Virtuous Cities, he stands firm on the belief that the ideal “Virtuous City” can only occur under the leadership of the Prophet. Al-Farabi believes that the level of knowledge and wisdom attained by the Prophet exceeds that of any other human being since the Prophet possesses a connection to the “divine source of truth and knowledge”. The religious dimension of Al-Farabi’s thought extends towards claiming that ultimate happiness can be fulfilled in the after-life, whereas Plato holds to the belief that happiness can be achieved in this life through contemplation and knowledge.

In my opinion, the above similarities and differences reflect the effect of the social and cultural context on Islamic philosophy and political perceptions. To begin with, it is necessary to remember that Islam as a social movement was centralized in the Arabian Peninsula, and its transformation towards statehood came after its expansion and cultivation with civilizations in Persia, the Levant and Egypt. For this reason, the development of Islam from a social movement led by Prophet Muhammad in the tribal-based Arabian Peninsula towards an empire can only be explained through the diffusion of philosophical and political schemes from surrounding civilizations, one of which is the Greek civilization. Hence, the similarities between Al-Farabi and Plato manifest the transcendence of philosophy and political theories among cultures over the course of history. On the other hand, the differences between the two models can be explained through the difference in the social and cultural context between Ancient Greece and Islam. The first difference lies in the foundations of Islam as a monotheistic religion that derives its morals and norms from the “divine” through the revelations of Prophet Muhammad. However, Greek philosophy originates from human sources, with much emphasis placed on the role of humans in defining and practicing morality (regardless of the belief in an ultimate or subjective truth). For this reason, one can detect Al-Farabi’s commitment to the superiority of Prophet Muhammad in contrast to Plato’s definition of a “class” of philosophers-kings. All in all, the assessment of a certain philosophy involves studying the historic and social contexts that give rise to the values and norms defined by the philosophy. Studying Islamic philosophy has always risen debate between those who believe in the divine source of Islam and those who assess Islam from a social and political lens. However, many evidence hints at the huge influence exerted by previous cultures on the formulation of Islamic philosophy. One of the most important sources of influence is present in Greek philosophy, and this can be detected

through the comparison between Plato and Al-Farabi. The similarities between Plato’s “Republic” and Al-Farabi’s “Virtuous City” on the level of defining happiness and hierarchical structure of governance based on virtue give insight to the transcendence of philosophy among cultures. After all, the human factor in Islamic philosophy remains the integral part behind its development, and the continuity of human civilization allows us to understand Islamic philosophy as an essential phase in the continuous timeline of civilization.

References: Al-Mudhareb, A. A. (1988). The Political Philosophy of Plato and al-Farabi: "The Republic" and "The Virtuous City". Islam M., (2013). The ideal State/Society of Plato and al-Farabi : Acomparative analysis. Retrieved from: https://www.scribd.com/doc/161626502/The-ideal-State-Society-of-Plato-andal-Farabi-A-comparative-analysis-by-Muhammad-Rafiqul-Islam-IJIT-V-2-N-1-2013...