In this work, Kenan Malik explores the history of moral thought as it has developed over three millennia, from Homer's Greece to Mao's China, from ancient India to modern America. It tells the stories of the great philosophers, and breathes life into their ideas, while also challenging many of our most cherished moral beliefs.

The economic mentality, which is a subfield of economic history studies, has been a little worked area on itself since Sabri F. Ülgener, except names such as Ahmet Tabakoğlu and Ahmet G. Sayar in economic history and history of economic thought area. This area, referred to as the Ottoman or Turkish economic mentality, was tried to be explained more by religion with M. Weber, W. Sombart and R.H. Tawney's influence. The explanation to be made here is based on social culture. (...) Social culture refers to language as Turkish, holistic and particularist culture. It is moved from Hüseyin R. Göktaş's Turkish as language and Murat Önderman's views on collectivist and particularist culture and social control while it is presented economic mentality of the "work" in Turkish and its projection on language. In the context of culture, the subject has been finalized with a proposal for a history period and a naming for Turks. (shrink)

Considerable attention in bioethics has been devoted to moral expertise and its implications for handling applied moral problems. The existence and nature of moral expertise has been a contested topic, and particularly, whether philosophers are moral experts. In this study, we put the question of philosophers’ moral expertise in a wider context, utilizing a novel and global study among 4,087 philosophers from 96 countries. We find that despite the skepticism in recent literature, the vast majority of philosophers do believe in (...) moral expertise and in the contribution of philosophical training and experience to its acquisition. Yet, they still differ on what philosophers’ moral expertise consists of. While they widely accept that philosophers possess superior analytic abilities regarding moral matters, they diverge on whether they also possess improved ability to judge moral problems. Nonetheless, most philosophers in our sample believe that philosophers possess an improved ability to both analyze and judge moral problems and that they commonly see these two capacities as going hand in hand. We also point at significant associations between personal and professional attributes and philosophers’ beliefs, such as age, working in the field of moral philosophy, public involvement, and association with the analytic tradition. We discuss the implications of these findings for the debate about moral expertise. -/- . (shrink)

This paper connects the debate regarding perceptual representation of high-level properties and the debate regarding non-conceptual perceptual representation. I present and defend a distinction between representationally-complex properties and properties that are simpler to represent and offer ways of assessing whether a property is representationally complex. I address conditions under which such a property might be non-conceptually represented and conclude that most representationally-complex properties are simply too complex to be non-conceptually represented. Thus, most mental states that represent representationally-complex properties must be (...) conceptual. This conclusion is relevant for a variety of philosophical theories (perception, ethics, emotions, pain) and is especially dramatic with respect to accounts according to which a mental state can non-conceptually represent such properties. As a test case for applying my argument I consider a group of such accounts: non-conceptual perceptual views of emotions, which my argument entails are false. I end by considering the implications my argument has for different theories. -/- . (shrink)

In recent decades, the discipline of bioethics has grown rapidly, as has the practice of ethical consultation. Interestingly, this new recognition of the relevance of moral philosophy to our daily life has been accompanied by skepticism among philosophers regarding the existence of moral expertise or the benefits of philosophical training. In his recent article in Bioethics, William R. Smith suggested that this skepticism is rooted in philosophers' belief that moral expertise is inconsistent with liberal–democratic values, when in fact they are (...) compatible. In this paper, we provide a unique opportunity to empirically examine Smith's observation by utilizing and extending global data on philosophers' beliefs about moral expertise, involving 4087 philosophers from 96 countries. Our findings support Smith's theoretical observation and show that societal levels of support for liberal–democratic values are associated with greater skepticism about moral expertise. We suggest that these findings might be explained by the cognitive process of motivated reasoning and an invalid inference of “is” from “ought.” Consequently, the potential tension between moral expertise and liberal–democratic values is invalidly used for rejecting the existence of moral expertise, while its main and valid implication is for how moral expertise should be applied in liberal–democratic settings. (shrink)

This study aims to analyze the concept of faith focusing on the Karrāmiya in Khurasan, which was pioneered by Muhammad b. Karrām (190/805-255/868). The Karrāmiya claimed that one’s (public) testimony of faith is enough to be considered a Muslim as opposed to those who held that there is a relationship between faith and actions and argued for the assent (taṣdīq) of faith at the heart. The Karrāmīs were criticized because, according to their opponents, they seem to accept hypocrites as Muslims (...) and separate faith from deeds. The sources of the Karrāmiya are scarce and therefore we have to build their views based on heresiographical works. When the concept of faith is taken into account in the context of the Qur'an, it has different aspects. The Qur’an mentions the concept of faith within the contexts of will (irāda), knowledge (‘ilm), assent (taṣdīq), the unseen (al-ghayb), and deeds (‘amal). Although the Karrāmīs did not seem to make emphases on those aspects of faith, we do not have reliable sources suggesting that they denied those Qur’anic aspects. We will shed some light on the Karrāmīs’ view of faith in this study. (shrink)

A recent empirical study has argued that experts in the ethics or the law of war cannot reach reasonable convergence on dilemmas regarding the number of civilian casualties who may be killed as a side effect of attacks on legitimate military targets. This article explores the philosophical implications of that study. We argue that the wide disagreement between experts on what in bello proportionality means in practice casts serious doubt on their ability to provide practical real-life guidance. We then suggest (...) viewing in bello proportionality through the prism of virtue ethics. (shrink)

The religiosity of academics has been studied for over a decade. With few exceptions, this research has been conducted on American “elite” scientists, and data from non-Western countries is lacking. Drawing from psychological and sociological literature, the present exploratory study investigates the religiosity of Turkish academics and their perceptions on the relationship between religion and science, and associated variables such as interpretation of the Quran, and belief in evolution and creationism. Moreover, we address criticism directed at previous research by probing (...) for different God concepts among believing academics. Although cultural differences can be identified, the results generally support the idea that academics are less religious with 54% identifying as “less religious” or “not religious,” compared to 24.2% self-identifying as “religious” or “extremely religious.”. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Storytelling and Narrative Knowing:An Examination of the Epistemic Benefits of Well-Told StoriesSarah E. Worth (bio)IntroductionPeople love to tell stories. When something scary, or funny, or out of the ordinary happens, we cannot wait to tell others about it. If it was really funny, etc., we tell the story repeatedly, embellishing as we see fit, shortening or lengthening it as the circumstances prescribe. When people are bad storytellers we tend (...) not to pay as close attention to their stories; our minds drift, and we hope for a swift conclusion. We tend not to remember those stories as well as the ones that were carefully constructed and skillfully delivered. Storytelling is one of our primary forms of communication with other people. Narrativity is the principle way that human beings order their experience in time. It is also one of the primary ways that humans make coherent sense out of seemingly unrelated sequences of events. Thus, an account of how this ordering works is essential to understanding one of the many ways of knowing used by humans, one that has been widely unaccounted for, I believe. What I will argue in this article is that reading, telling, and hearing well-constructed narratives are not just idle pastimes that we have created for entertainment purposes or even as a mere means of communication. Rather, there are epistemological benefits to reading, hearing, and telling well-constructed narratives. In particular, by practicing what I call narrative reasoning, we develop this skill, just as by practicing discursive reasoning we develop discursive reasoning skills. In turn, we develop an enhanced reasoning ability that arises from narrative reasoning and narrative meaning construction. Ultimately, I will argue that those who are able to develop the capacity to reason narratively will be able to have a more comprehensive understanding of the human experience. [End Page 42]Defining NarrativeTo begin, I will go into some detail about what I mean when I talk about narratives since the reasoning skills that will ultimately come from engaging with narratives will be related to the way that we come to understand and make sense of them. Since I do not intend to posit a theory of narrative, I will talk about what constitutes narrativity and what sort of features contribute to increasing the narrativity of a story. To begin, narrative is generally the representation of an event or sequence of events. It is closely tied to description, but it goes beyond description. "My cat has fleas" is a description of a state of affairs. "My cat was bitten by a flea" is a narrative about my cat, which includes a description. Some theorists (such as Barthes and Rimmon-Kenan) argue that a narrative must consist of more than one event or state of affairs in order to be minimally considered a narrative. For my purposes, the change in states of affairs from one to another will be essential for understanding the cognitive aspects that can be gained from engaging with narrative. Although I do not advocate a minimal requirement for something to be considered a narrative, at least two, if not multiple, states of affairs increase narrativity significantly. Narratives also have a unified subject and some relatively easily understood temporal structure. Although many narratives do not order all of their events sequentially, good narratives will have a temporal order that can be gleaned by its reader.1An annal might be something that is temporally ordered and likely have more than two events or states of affairs, and for this reason it might be put into a category of "story form." The primary principle of organization of an annal, however, is merely a temporal list of events. It cannot count as a full-fledged narrative since it may be a temporal list of events that has no unified subject. For example,A: "The Space shuttle Challenger explodes in 1988, the Berlin wall comes down in 1989, there is a massacre at Srebenica, Bosnia in 1995."B: "The Space Shuttle Columbia blows up upon reentry to Earth; the Space Shuttle Challenger explodes upon take off."A is a temporally ordered list of events and is an annal; B, however, is... (shrink)

I think … we ought to distinguish two sense of “deconstruction.” In one sense the word refers to the philosophical projects of Jacques Derrida. Taken this way, breaking down the distinction between philosophy and literature is essential to deconstruction. Derrida’s initiative in philosophy continues along a line laid down by Friedrich Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger. He rejects, however, Heidegger’s distinctions between “thinkers” and “poets” and between the few thinkers and the many scribblers. So Derrida rejects the sort of philosophical professionalism (...) which Nietzsche despised and which Heidegger recovered. This does indeed lead Derrida in the direction of “a general, undifferentiated textuality.” In his work, the philosophy-literature distinction is, at most, part of a ladder which we can let go of once we have climbed up it.In a second sense of “deconstruction,” however, the term refers to a method of reading texts. Neither this method, nor any other, should be attributed to Derrida—who shares Heidegger’s contempt for the very idea of method.2 But the method exists, and the passage I have quoted from Culler describes one of its essential features. Culler is quite right to say that deconstruction, in the second sense, needs a clear distinction between philosophy and literature. For the kind of reading which has come to be called “deconstructionist” requires two different straight persons: a macho professional philosopher who is insulted by the suggestion that he has submitted to a textual exigency, and a naive producer of literature whose jaw drops when she learns that her work has been supported by philosophical oppositions. The philosopher had thought of himself as speaking a sparse, pure, transparent language. The poetess shyly hoped that her unmediated woodnotes might please. Both reel back in horror when the deconstructionist reveals that each has been making use of complex idioms to which the other has contributed. Both go all to pieces at this news. A wild disorder overtakes their words. Their whimpers lend into interminable androgynous keening. Once again, deconstructionist intervention has produced a splendidly diffuse irresolution. Richard Rorty is Kenan Professor of Humanities at the University of Virginia. He is the author of Consequences of Pragmatism and is currently writing a book on Martin Heidegger. (shrink)

Welcome to the 25th volume 1st issue of Cumhuriyet Theology Journal. With this issue, we are excited and happy to be 25 years old. Cumhuriyet Theology Journal has gained a rapid momentum with its format and publishing principles, and managed to attract the attention of the world of science. With the Isnad Citation System developed within the Cumhuriyet Theology Journal and the work-shops held in 2018 and 2019, a number of decisions were taken to increase the publication quality of Theology (...) Field Journals and many of them were implemented. The third workshop was carried out virtual on 26 December 2020 under the name of "Social Sciences Academic Publishing Workshop III" in cooperation with Atatürk High Insti-tution of Culture, Language and History and Sivas Cumhuriyet University. The theme of the workshop was determined as "Refereed Journal Publishing". Preparations for our 4th workshop have begun. In this sense, our journal continues its mission of being both a new ecole and a school with an effort to increase the quality of academic publishing. Moreover, we have also announced the preliminary review form and the review form for the blind review process. We examine Turkish and English titles, summaries, and keywords to make sure that they correspond to the field’s terminology. Furthermore, we require proper nouns and concepts/terms to be written in the reference style of TDV Encyclopaedia of Islam. We also particularly require for the articles to use the Isnad Citation Style. To improve the academic quality of the journal, we have also checked the article up for plagiarism. The articles that are marked with a result above %15 are returned to the authors with a plagiarism report. It might be right to note here that we have been getting more attention from scholarly world day by day with our mission and standards. The journal has received 93 articles between January 1- March 1, 2021 from the academic world. All articles went through the pre-review process to check the referencing and transliteration style before testing them using a plagiarism checker. We then have forwarded the articles that successfully passed the plagiarism check to our reviewers. Following this process, we have been able to offer to you 25 articles three of which are in English at this issue. We are delighted to offer you the various ranges of themes and topics with this new issue. We sincerely thank the contributors for their submission, the editorial and review board, and particularly to the assistant editors, Dr. Mehmet Çetin, Dr. Ayşe Mine Akar, Dr. Necati İşler, Res. Asst. Maruf Çakır, Res. Asst. Esma Güneş, Res. Asst. Bayram Ünce, Res. Asst. Sena Kaplan, Res. Asst. Gülistan Aktaş, Res. Asst. Hamit Demir, Res. Asst. Merve Yetim, Res. Asst. Rukiye Göğen, Res. Asst. Ömer Faruk Özbek, Res. Asst. Salime Bera Kemikli, Res. Asst. Naim Yaman, Res. Asst. Sema Tombul, Res. Asst. Nurgül Akdoğan, Res. Asst. İlknur Bahadır, Res. Asst. Adil Koyuncu and the editors of the language revie process Prof. Dr. Ömer Faruk Yavuz, Prof. Dr. Savaş Kocabaş (Arabic), Dr. Miyase Yavuz Altıntaş, Assoc. Prof. Zuhal Ağılkaya Şahin, Dr. Metin Güven, Dr. Kenan Tekin, Dr. Hakime Reyyan Yaşar, Dr. Meryem Berrin Bulut and Dr. Elif Hilal Karaman (English) and statistics editor Assoc. Prof. Murat Akyıldız. For the next issue, which will be published on December 15, 2021 we announce the acceptance of the articles from July 1 to September 1 by our editorial board. We wish you convenience in your studies. (shrink)

Nothing I wrote in Is There a Text in This Class? has provoked more opposition or consternation than my claim that the argument of the book has no consequences for the practice of literary criticism.1 To many it seemed counterintuitive to maintain that an argument in theory could leave untouched the practice it considers: After all, isn’t the very point of theory to throw light on or reform or guide practice? In answer to this question, I want to say, first, (...) that this claim is unsupportable. Here, I am in agreement with Steven Knapp and Walter Benn Michaels, who are almost alone in agreeing with me and who fault me not for making the “no consequences” argument but for occasionally falling away from it. Those dislike Is There a Text in This Class? tend to dislike “Against Theory” even more, and it is part of my purpose here to account for the hostility to both pieces. But since the issues at stake are fundamental, it is incumbent to begin at the beginning with a discussion of what theory is and is not. 1. See my Is There a Text in This Class?: The Authority of Interpretive Communities , p. 370. For a response to the “no consequences” claim, see Mary Louise Pratt, “Interpretive Strategies/Strategic Interpretations: on Anglo-American Reader Response Criticism,” Boundary 2 11 : 222. Stanley Fish is the William Kenan, Jr., Professor of English and the Humanities at the Johns Hopkins University. His most recent contributions to Critical Inquiry are “Profession Despise Thyself: Fear and Self-Loathing in Literary Studies” and “Fear of Fish:”A Reply to Walter Davis” . The present essay is the concluding chapter of Change. (shrink)

The jargon of evolutionary psychology has recently migrated from a few minor American universities into the academic mainstream and thence into Sunday supplements and dinner party conversations. It has even formed the backdrop to at least one award-winning novel (McEwan, 1997). Evolutionary psychology and other similar ‘biological’ explanations of human conduct pervade the Zeitgeist and, as Kenan Malik has persuasively argued, they tap into a prevailing mood of cultural pessimism. Evolutionary psychology, it seems, speaks to our desire to see (...) the worst in ourselves (Malik, 2002). (shrink)

Bishop was both fully at home in, and fully estranged from, Nova Scotia and Brazil. In Nova Scotia, after Bishop’s father had died, her mother went insane; Bishop lived there with her grandparents from the age of three to the age of six. She then left to be raised by an aunt in Massachusetts, but spent summers in Nova Scotia till she was thirteen. Subsequent adult visits north produced poems like “Cape Breton,” “At the Fishhouses,” and “The Moose”; and Bishop (...) responded eagerly to other poets, like John Brinnin and Mark Strand, who knew that landscape. Nova Scotia represented a harsh pastoral to which, though she was rooted in it, she could not return. Brazil, on the other hand, was a place of adult choice, where she bought and restored a beautiful eighteenth-century house in Ouro Prêto. It was yet another pastoral, harsh in a different, tropical way—a pastoral exotic enough to interest her noticing eye but one barred to her by language and culture . Foreign abroad, foreign at home, Bishop appointed herself a poet of foreignness, which is, far more than “travel,” her subject. Three of her books have geographical names—“North and South,” “Questions of Travel,” and “Geography III”—and she feels a geographer’s compulsions precisely because she is a foreigner, not a native. Her early metaphor for a poem is a map, and she scrutinized that metaphor, we may imagine, because even as a child she had had to become acquainted through maps with the different territories she lived in and traveled back and forth between. In the poem “Crusoe in England,” Bishop’s Robinson Crusoe, shipwrecked on his island, has nightmares of having to explore more and more new islands and of being required to be their geographer: I’d have nightmares of other islands stretching away from min, infinities of islands, islands spawning islands, ………………………………………… knowing that I had to live on each and every one, eventually, for ages, registering their flora, their fauna, their geography.This recurrent anxiety marks the end of one of Bishop’s earlier dreams—that one could go home, or find a place that felt like home. In “A Cold Spring,” a book recording chiefly some unhappy years preceding her move to Brazil, there had yet survived the dream of going home, in a poem using the Prodigal Son as surrogate. He deludes himself, by drinking, that he can be happy away, but finally his evening horrors in exile determine him to return: Carrying a bucket along a slimy board, he felt the bats’ uncertain staggering flight, his shuddering insights, beyond his control, touching him. But it took him a long time finally to make his mind up to go home. [“The Prodigal Son”] Helen Vendler is Kenan Professor of English at Harvard University. She has written books on Yeats, Stevens, Herbert, and Keats, and is now working on a study of Shakespeare’s sonnets. She has recently edited the Harvard Book of Contemporary American Poetry. (shrink)

My colleague E. D. Hirsch has skillfully developed the consequences for literary interpretation of a “realistic” epistemological position which he formulates as follows: “If we could not distinguish a content of consciousness from its contexts, we could not know any object at all in the world.” Given that premise, it is easy for Hirsch to infer that “without the stable determinacy of meaning there can be no knowledge in interpretation.”1 A lot of people disagree with Hirsch on the latter point, (...) and they look to philosophy for replies to the premise from which it was inferred. But it is not clear where in philosophy they should look: To epistemology? Ethics?2 Philosophy of language? What Jacques Derrida calls “a new logic, … a graphematics of iterability”?3 Where do we find first principles from which to deduce an anti-Hirsch argument?I want to argue that there is no clear or straight answer to this question and that there need be none. I shall begin by criticizing the strategy used against Hirsch and others by my fellow pragmatists Steven Knapp and Walter Benn Michaels. They think that one can start with philosophy of language and straighten things out by adopting a correct account of meaning. I share their desire to refute Hirsch, their admiration for Stanley Fish, and their view that “theory”—when defined as “an attempt to govern interpretations of particular texts by appealing to an account of interpretation in general”—has got to go . But they want to defend this position by exposing a mistake which they think common to all theory so defined: an error about the relation between meaning and intention. They assert that “what is intended and what is meant are identical” and that one will look for an “account of interpretation in general” only if one fails to recognize this identity . Such failure leads to an attempt to connect meaning and intention or to disconnect them . But such attempts must fail, for they presuppose a break “between language and speech acts” which does not exist . 1. E. D. Hirsch, Jr., The Aims of Interpretation , pp. 3, 1.2. See ibid., where Hirsch offers a “fundamental ethical maxim for interpretation” which, he says, “claims no privileged sanction from metaphysics or analysis” . Here and elsewhere Hirsch suggests that it may be ethics rather than epistemology which provides the principles that govern interpretation. There remain other passages, however, in which he retains the view, conspicuous in his earlier writings, that an analysis of the idea of knowledge is the ultimate justification for his approach.3. Jacques Derrida, “Limited Inc abc … , ” Glyph 2 : 219. Richard Rorty is Kenan Professor of Humanities at the University of Virginia. He is the author of Consequences of Pragmatism , among other works, and is currently writing a book on Martin Heidegger. His previous contribution to Critical Inquiry, “Deconstruction and Circumvention,” appeared in the September 1984 issue. (shrink)

Dear readers, Welcome to the 25th Volume 3rd Issue - Basic Islamic Sciences Special Issue- of Cumhuriyet Theology Journal. We are excited and happy to present you many current researches in this issue. We would like to express that we make all our efforts with a large team to carry the valuable works entrusted to us to the international arena. In our special issue we allocated to articles with the theme of Basic Islamic Sciences, 26 articles have been presented to (...) the attention of our readers. We sincerely thank the contributors for their submission, the editorial and review board, and particularly to the assistant editors, Dr. Mehmet Çetin, Dr. Ayşe Mine Akar, Dr. Necati İşler, Res. Asst. Maruf Çakır, Res. Asst. Esma Güneş, Res. Asst. Bayram Ünce, Res. Asst. Sena Kaplan, Res. Asst. Gülistan Kızıleniş, Res. Asst. Hamit Demir, Res. Asst. Merve Yetim, Res. Asst. Rukiye Göğen, Res. Asst. Ömer Faruk Özbek, Res. Asst. Salime Bera Kemikli, Res. Asst. Naim Yaman, Res. Asst. Sema Tombul, Res. Asst. Nurgül Akdoğan, Res. Asst. İlknur Bahadır, Res. Asst. Adil Koyuncu, Res. Asst. Yakup Esenboğa, Res. Asst. Abdurrahman Poyraz and the editors of the language review-process Prof. Dr. Ömer Faruk Yavuz (Arabic), Dr. Miyase Yavuz Altıntaş, Assoc. Prof. Zuhal Ağılkaya Şahin, Dr. Metin Güven, Dr. Kenan Tekin, Dr. Hakime Reyyan Yaşar, Dr. Meryem Berrin Bulut, Dr. Elif Hilal Karaman (English), Dr. Fatümetül Zehra Güldaş (English) and and statistics editor Assoc. Prof. Murat Akyıldız. For the next issue, which will be published on June 15, 2022 we remind acceptance dates from January 1 to February 28. We wish you convenience in your studies. Our journal now has been indexed by various international indexes: TURKISH NATIONAL DATABASE Social Sciences and Humanities Database (Accepted: 13/11/2015) The European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences (Accepted: 25/03/2016) ATLA RDB©: ATLA Religion Database© (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 20/05/2016) BROWZINE Academic Journal Collections (Accepted: 07/07/2016) J-GATE: E-Journal Gateway (Accepted: 07/07/2016) ROAD: Directory Of Open Access Scholarly Resources (Accepted: 24/08/2016) DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals (Accepted: 02/09/2016) MLA International Bibliography (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 14/06/2016) CEEOL: Central and Eastern European Online Library (Accepted: 06/10/2016) EBSCO Humanities International Index (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 07/01/2016) EBSCO Humanities Source Ultimate Database (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 07/01/2016) PHILPAPERS: Bibliography of Philosophy (Accepted: 01/01/2016) ROOT INDEXING: Journal Abstracting and Indexing (Accepted: 12/02/2017) ESCI: Emerging Sources Citation Index (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 01/01/2016) ProQuest Central (Accepted: 15/01/2017, 21/1) ProQuest Turkey Database (Accepted: 15/01/2017, 21/1) mIndex Islamicus (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 13/12/2017) Scopus (S.Date: 01/01/2016; Accepted: 23/01/2018). (shrink)

Welcome to the 25th volume 2nd issue of Cumhuriyet Theology Journal. With this issue, we are excited and happy to be 25 years old. Cumhuriyet Theology Journal has gained a rapid momentum with its format and publishing principles, and managed to attract the attention of the world of science. With the Isnad Citation System developed within the Cumhuriyet Theology Journal and the work-shops held in 2018, 2019 and 2020, a number of decisions were taken to increase the publi-cation quality of (...) Theology Field Journals and many of them were implemented. The fourth workshop was carried out virtual on 25-27 December 2021 under the name of "Turkey Editors' Workshop - 4" by Sivas Cumhuriyet University and participation of the representatives of stakeholder universities, institutions and organizations. (https://editorlercalistayi.com/) The theme of the workshop was determined as "Scientific Book and Journal Publish-ing in Universities: Current Situation – Problems – Needs – Solution Proposals – Sample Practices". Preparations for our 5th workshop have begun. In this sense, our journal contin-ues its mission of being both a new ecole and a school with an effort to increase the quality of academic publishing. Moreover, we have also announced the preliminary review form and the review form for the blind review process. We examine Turkish and English titles, summaries, and keywords to make sure that they correspond to the field’s terminology. Furthermore, we require proper nouns and concepts/terms to be written in the reference style of TDV Ency-clopaedia of Islam. We also particularly require for the articles to use the Isnad Citation Style. To improve the academic quality of the journal, we have also checked the article up for plagiarism. The articles that are marked with a result above %15 are returned to the authors with a plagiarism report. It might be right to note here that we have been getting more attention from scholar-ly world day by day with our mission and standards. The journal has received 81 articles between July 1- August 31, 2021 from the academic world. All articles went through the pre-review process to check the referencing and transliteration style before testing them using a plagiarism checker. We then have forwarded the articles that successfully passed the plagia-rism check to our reviewers. Following this process, we have been able to offer to you 21 articles one of which are in Arabic at this issue. We are delighted to offer you the various ranges of themes and topics with this new issue. We sincerely thank the contributors for their submission, the editorial and review board, and particularly to the assistant editors, Dr. Mehmet Çetin, Dr. Ayşe Mine Akar, Dr. Necati İşler, Res. Asst. Maruf Çakır, Res. Asst. Esma Güneş, Res. Asst. Bayram Ünce, Res. Asst. Sena Kaplan, Res. Asst. Gülistan Kızıleniş, Res. Asst. Hamit Demir, Res. Asst. Merve Yetim, Res. Asst. Rukiye Göğen, Res. Asst. Ömer Faruk Özbek, Res. Asst. Salime Bera Kemikli, Res. Asst. Naim Yaman, Res. Asst. Sema Tombul, Res. Asst. Nurgül Akdoğan, Res. Asst. İlknur Bahadır, Res. Asst. Adil Koyuncu, Res. Asst. Yakup Esenboğa, Res. Asst. Abdurrahman Poyraz and the editors of the language revie process Prof. Dr. Ömer Faruk Yavuz, Prof. Dr. Savaş Kocabaş (Arabic), Dr. Miyase Yavuz Altıntaş, Assoc. Prof. Zuhal Ağılkaya Şahin, Dr. Metin Güven, Dr. Kenan Tekin, Dr. Hakime Reyyan Yaşar, Dr. Meryem Berrin Bulut and Dr. Elif Hilal Karaman (English), Dr. Fatümetül Zehra Güldaş and statistics editor Assoc. Prof. Murat Akyıldız. For the next issue, which will be published on June 15, 2022 we announce the ac-ceptance of the articles from January 1 to February 28 by our editorial board. We wish you convenience in your studies. (shrink)

It may seem that I am simply confirming Davis’ assertion that in my view of the critical process “different interpretive strategies create completely different texts with no point of comparison” ; but the differences are not all that complete. While many readers now see a God who is more dramatically effective than Pope’s “school divine,” they still see a God who exists in a defining relationship with the figure of Satan, a Satan who is himself significantly changed from the energy-bearing (...) Byronic antihero who was for so long a “given” in the interpretive landscape. The point is, again, that changes do not occur in isolation, because the facts that have undergone change did not exist in isolation either. In the history of Milton criticism, any judgment against God is always and simultaneously a judgment for Satan ; and it follows that a reversal in one pole of the judgment cannot occur without a corresponding—that is, related—reversal in the other. Any increase in the literary “cash value” of Milton’s God will be registered at the expense of his Satan.In short, since literary judgments or observations are not made piecemeal, the process of challenging and changing them is not piecemeal either. That is why it is not “contradictory,” as Davis asserts, “to talk about recalcitrant features of a text” in the context of a thesis that makes the text’s features a function of interpretation . The source of recalcitrance or resistance is not the text as it exists independently of interpretation, but the text as an authoritative and elaborated interpretation has given it to us. I stress “elaborated” because the interpretation is not a single assertion but a complex of assertions; and when a challenge is made to the interpreted text at one point, its other points constitute a reservoir from which objections and “counterchallenges” can emerge. Thus, when someone offers a revisionist account of Milton’s God, a skeptical or unpersuaded reader will respond by observing that this account is incompatible with what we know to be true about other parts of the poem: the characterization of Satan, or of the War in Heaven, or of books 11 and 12. It is then the obligation of the revisionist critic either to demonstrate there is no incompatibility or to extend his new reading in such a way as to recharacterize those parts of the poem that seem to stand as refutations of the revisionist’s reading. He will then be working against resistance, but it will not be the resistance of something that stands outside interpretation; rather it will be the resistance offered by one interpretively produced shape to the production of another. Stanley Fish is the William Kenan, Jr., Professor of English and the Humanities at the Johns Hopkins University. His contributions to Critical Inquiry include “Working on the Chain Gang: Interpretation in the Law and in Literary Criticism” and “Profession Despise Thyself: Fear and Self-Loathing in Literary Studies”. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:7 Franciscan Studies 62 (2004) THE FRANCISCAN INSTITUTE HONORS GIOVANNI MICCOLI On July 16, 2004 Professor Giovanni Miccoli, a respected scholar of medieval, Church and Franciscan history, received the Franciscan Institute Medal from St. Bonaventure University during its celebration of the Feast of St. Bonaventure. University president Sr. Margaret Carney, O.S.F., and Fr. Michael Cusato, O.F.M., director of The Franciscan Institute and dean of the School of Franciscan Studies, (...) presented the medal during an Academic Convocation at 7 p.m. in The Regina A. Quick Center for the Arts. A reception followed in the Dresser-Rand Atrium. During the Convocation, Giovanni Miccoli gave a presentation, “A Reading of the Christian Proposal of Francis According to His First Biographers,” continuing a longtime focus on the study of Francis of Assisi and his contributions to the Church. Professor Miccoli, who was born in Trieste, Italy, in 1933, studied in Pisa at the Scuola Normale Superiore and the Università, in Munich at the Monumenta Germaniae Historica, and London at the Warburg Institute. He has taught in Pisa, Venice and his native Trieste, where he is now a professor emeritus at the Università di Trieste. A historian of the Middle Ages and of the Roman Catholic Church, he has combined those loves to specialize first in the Gregorian Reformation, reforms undertaken within the Church under Pope Gregory VII at the end of the 11th century. Turning his eyes to more modern times, he is also an expert on the relationship between the Catholic Church and Fascism in Italy, including the questions related to Pius XII’s pontificate during World War II. His study of the Church in Italy during the Middle Ages led to a focus on Francis of Assisi and his impact on the Church, which led to his becoming one of foremost Franciscan scholars of modern times. Miccoli is particularly known for his contribution to 1974’s “La Storia Religiosa” (Religious History of Italy), which is the second volume of “Storia d’Italia” (History of Italy). In “La Storia Religiosa” he examined how Francis and his movement influenced the history and development of the Church in Italy. 8 GIOVANNI MICCOLI Since that time, he has published several major articles on Franciscan issues, largely drawing from early Franciscan documents and sources, which have been translated from Italian to English and published in Greyfriars Review, a publication of the Franciscan Institute. One essay, “Francis of Assisi’s Christian Proposal,” was published in Italian in 1983 and in Greyfriars Review in 1989; another, “A Christian Experience Between Gospel and Institution,” appeared in Italian in 1992 and in Greyfriars Review in 1997; while a third, “The Writings of Francis,” was published in Italian in 1997 and in Greyfriars Review in 2001. The Franciscan Institute established the medal in 1987 to honor scholars who have made outstanding contributions to Franciscan studies in the areas of philosophy, theology, history and spirituality. Giovanni Miccoli was the 16th recipient of the medal. Recent honorees have included Fr. Clément Schmitt, O.F.M., Sr. Ingrid Peterson, O.S.F., Fr. Kenan Osborne, O.F.M., and Fr. Zachary Hayes, O.F.M. THE FRANCISCAN PROPOSAL OF GIOVANNI MICCOLI Giovanni Miccoli was born a little more than seventy years ago in the city of Trieste in northern Italy. He studied at the Scuola normale superiore of Pisa, the most prestigious school in Italy, where he was taught by renowned professors, particularly Arsenio Frugoni. He also received scholarships to study in Munich, Germany, and in London, England. Although he was offered a wide variety of important research and teaching positions in the major cities of Italy, he chose scholarly authority over academic power, and decided to return to his home town and join the university of Trieste, where he taught until his recent appointment as professor emeritus. Trieste is a city at the crossroads of the Latin, Germanic and Slavic worlds. Although largely ignored nowadays, in the past it was the harbor of Austria and, more recently during the Cold War, the last city of Western Europe facing the communist world. It is an enigmatic, fascinating city. This evening we honor Giovanni Miccoli as one of the greatest... (shrink)

A great fissure occurred in Western civilization in the early modern period with the divorce between the humanities and the sciences and the rise of scientific naturalism. The Metaphysics of Self and World is a philosophical exploration of the relationship between the individual, the culture, and the world. It is, in the author's words, "a philosophy of the humanities, a philosophy of humanity, and a philosophy of social reality." It explores the implications of a world-view that would integrate the perspective (...) of the sciences with humanistic ways of thought. E.M. Adams claims that we do violence to ourselves as human beings by trying to fit into the world as delineated in scientific categories. Rejecting cultural subjectivism and scientific naturalism, he argues for the irreducibility and validity of the categories of the humanities and for a fully developed humanistic philosophy of self and world. In generating this world-view, he utilizes the humanities as a source of culture therapy in order to close the fissure in Western civilization. Author note: E. M. Adams is Kenan Professor of Philosophy, Emeritus, at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He has written numerous books and articles, and a festschrift celebrating his work, Mind, Value, and Culture: Essays in Honor of E. M. Adams (edited by David Weissbord), was published in 1989. (shrink)

The monster and the woman thus find themselves on the same side, the side of dissimilarity. “The female is as it were a deformed male,” added Aristotle . As she belongs to the category of the different, the female can only contribute more figures of dissimilarities, if not creatures even more monstrous. But the female is a necessary departure from the norm, a useful monstrosity. The monster is gratuitous and useless for future generations. Aristotle’s seminal work on the generation of (...) monsters posited a rigorously physical definition that was not necessarily linked to deformities: “Monstrosities,” he wrote, “come under the class of offspring which is unlike its parents” . Further, while a “monstrosity, of course, belongs to the class of ‘things contrary to Nature,’ … it is contrary not to Nature in her entirety but only to Nature in the generality of cases” .The monster, defined repeatedly by its lack of resemblance to its legitimate parents, is also monstrous in another important way, one that Aristotle described as a false resemblance to different species: “People say that the offspring which is formed has the head of a ram or an ox; and similarly with other creatures, that one has the head of another.… at the same time, in no case are they what they are alleged to be, but resemblances only” . The monster is thus a double imposture. Its strange appearance—a misleading likeness to another species, for example—belies the otherwise rigorous law that children should resemble their parents. Further, monsters offer striking similarities to categories to which they are not related, blurring the differences between genres, and disrupting the rigorous order of nature. Thus, if the monster were defined in the first place as that which did not resemble him who engendered it, it nevertheless displayed some sort of resemblance, albeit a false resemblance to an object external to its conception. Marie-Hélène Huet is William R. Kenan Professor of Romance Languages at Amherst College. She is the author of Rehearsing the Revolution: The Staging of Marat’s Death, 1793-1797 and is currently completing a book on literature and tetratology. (shrink)

Staten gets my intentions right when he suggests that I may simply have been saying that “the dream of philosophy is a rare but serious malady, now less common than it used to be, but currently threatening a new outbreak in the disguised form of deconstruction” . I had thought I was urging that the appropriation of Derrida in the Anglo-Saxon “Now let’s deconstruct literature” mode was a mistake and that there were some things in Derrida which had encouraged this (...) mistake—notably the Heideggerian suggestion that the “text of philosophy” was at the heart of our culture. State, however, finds me more cunning and ungenerous, harsher toward Derrida, than I had imagined myself to be. He may have a point, but is hard for me to tell. No author is much good at following “the rhetorical contours” of his own writing, since his beliefs about what he wanted to say keep leveling off the contours of what he actually wrote .The best I can do by way of reply to the charge that I was attempting to “ ‘encapsulate and circumvent’ ” Derrida is to take up a central ambiguity which Staten detects . He says that I flit back and forth between “two characterizations of the history of philosophy”: “a constantly changing, self-deconstructing enterprise which is therefore not characterizable in terms of any single system of metaphors,” and “a ‘metaphysical tradition’ which has dreamed the dream of a closed, total, and transparent vocabulary which would tell the whole truth and thing but the truth” . Richard Rorty is Kenan Professor of Humanities at the University of Virginia. He is the author of Consequences of Pragmatism , among other works, and is currently writing a book on Martin Heidegger. His previous contributions to Critical Inquiry are “Deconstruction and Circumvention” and “Philosophy without Principles”. (shrink)

Welcome to the 23rd volume 2nd issue of Cumhuriyet Theology Journal which left behind 22 years of academic publication journey. It is important to carry out valuable scientific studies in academic life as well as to reach a wide audience. Our journal has achieved great progress in both national and interna-tional academic publication. Today, almost all scientific knowledge can be reached through online access. The researchs in the field of religious studies in Turkey deserves to reach all the world beyond (...) the boundaries of the libraries. Cumhuriyet Theology Journal has gained a very rapid acceleration in the last five years by meeting the international publication criteria with its format and publication principles and has managed to attract the attention of the scientific world. The Isnad Citation Style developed within our journal and workshops con-ducted under the leadership of our journal are examples of the Theology Field Journals. We are pleased to announce two important news in this issue. The first is that the 2nd Edition of the Isnad Citation System is available to you, and the second is the addition of the Arabic language option to our journal. In 23rd volume 2nd issue two Arabic articles were published for the first time. Our journal now has been indexed by various international indexes: TURKISH NATIONAL DATABASE Social Sciences and Humanities Database (Accept-ed: 13/11/2015) The European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences (Accepted: 25/03/2016) ATLA RDB©: ATLA Religion Database© (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 20/05/2016) BROWZINE Academic Journal Collections (Accepted: 07/07/2016) J-GATE: E-Journal Gateway (Accepted: 07/07/2016) ROAD: Directory Of Open Access Scholarly Resources (Accepted: 24/08/2016) DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals (Accepted: 02/09/2016) MLA International Bibliography (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 14/06/2016) CEEOL: Central and Eastern European Online Library (Accepted: 06/10/2016) EBSCO Humanities International Index (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 07/01/2016) EBSCO Humanities Source Ultimate Database (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 07/01/2016) PHILPAPERS: Bibliography of Philosophy (Accepted: 01/01/2016) ROOT INDEXING: Journal Abstracting and Indexing (Accepted: 12/02/2017) ESCI: Emerging Sources Citation Index (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 01/01/2016) ProQuest Central (Accepted: 15/01/2017, 21/1) ProQuest Turkey Database (Accepted: 15/01/2017, 21/1) Index Islamicus (Indexing and Abstracting Start: 13/12/2017) Scopus (S.Date: 01/01/2016; Accepted: 23/01/2018) Moreover, we have also announced the preliminary review form and the review form for the blind review process. We examine Turkish and English titles, summaries, and keywords to make sure that they correspond to the field’s terminology. Furthermore, we require proper nouns and concepts/terms to be written in the reference style of TDV Ency-clopaedia of Islam. We also particularly require for the articles to use the Isnad Citation Style. To improve the academic quality of the journal, we have also checked the article up for plagiarism. The articles that are marked with a result above %15 are returned to the authors with a plagiarism report. It might be right to note here that we have been getting more attention from scholar-ly world day by day with our mission and standards. The journal has received 73 articles between July 1- Sptember 15, 2019 from the academic world. All articles went through the pre-review process to check the referencing and transliteration style before testing them using a plagiarism checker. We then have forwarded the articles that successfully passed the plagiarism check to our reviewers. Following this process, we have been able to offer to you 40 articles, a bookreview and a symposium review at two our issues. We are delighted to offer you the various ranges of themes and topics with this new issue. We sincerely thank the contributors for their submission, the editorial and review board, and particularly to the assistant editors, Dr. Adem Çiftci, Dr. Fatma Kurttekin, Res. Asst. Maruf Cakır, Res. Asst. Alper Ay, Res. Asst. Esma Güneş, Res. Asst. Bayram Ün-ce, Res. Asst. Sena Kaplan, Res. Asst. Gülistan Aktaş, Res. Asst. Hamit Demir Res. Asst. Merve Yetim, Res. Asst. Rukiye Göğen, Res. Asst. Ömer Faruk Özbek, Res. Asst. Salime Bera Kemikli, Res. Asst. Naim Yaman, Res. Asst. Sema Tombul, Res. Asst. Nurgül Akdoğan, Res. Asst. Ayşe Mine Akar, Res. Asst. İlknur Bahadır and the editors of the language review-process Prof. Dr. Ömer Faruk Yavuz, Dr. Miyase Yavuz Altıntaş, Zeynep Yucedoğru, Dr. Zuhal Ağılkaya Şahin, Dr. Metin Güven and Dr. Kenan Tekin. For the next issue, which will be published on June 15, 2020 we announce the ac-ceptance of the articles from Jenuary 1 to March 15 by our editorial board. We wish you convenience in your studies. (shrink)

This paper concerns Aristotle and Galen’s scientific method and the place of philosophy in their natural scientific endeavors as manifested in their discussions on the role of the heart in the formation of the embryo. I will begin first by discussing Aristotle’s conception of natural sciences and his discussion on the role of the heart in the body and embryo. Following this is Galen’s critique of the role of the heart in the formation of the embryo. Galen had considerably more (...) knowledge about anatomy and the construction of the embryo, yet his scientific method is not radically different from Aristotle’s as he also utilizes both logical arguments and observational data. Nevertheless, he attempts to banish philosophers from discussing anatomical issues, thus opening the path to specialization. (shrink)

Located in the northwest of the Lake Van basin, the city of Malazgirt was an important area of the kingdom of Urartu from its earliest period due to its stra- tegic location. Inscriptions of king Minua (810–785/80 BCE) mention important construction projects, including fortresses, temples, and irrigation canals, in and around Malazgirt. This article deals with the Urartian presence in Malazgirt, presents new Urartian inscriptions, and considers their significance for historical geography. Particularly important is the Leter stele, which informs us (...) of the correct reading of the name of the irrigation canal built by King Minua—Mezaiani, the antecedent form of Malazgirt. Another stele documents the agricultural activities of King Argišti (780–756 BCE). (shrink)

The paper analyses the concept of rationality as developed in the philosophical considerations of Robert Brandom. It is the analysis of Brandom's pragmatically-oriented discourse concerning the issue of rationality from the perspective of human being's linguistic practices, where only upon meeting the other members of specific linguistic community the aspects of human nature we may characterise by the term rationality are manifested. The central part of this paper treats Brandom's normative idiom that he postulates as explanatorily most suitable for understanding (...) the linguistic practices and the idea of rationality based upon them. (shrink)

The theme of this essay centers on the ways in which the theology of St. Bonaventure, who lived in the thirteenth century, can truly enhance the theological thinking of the twenty-first century. Bonaventure’s theological approach is fundamentally inter-relational, and inter-relational ways of thinking dominate the cultures of today’s world. Are these two forms of inter-relational perception compatible with one another? In this lecture, I attempt to show that the Franciscan world-view, especially as formulated by Bonaventure, offers a major format that (...) unites our current world with a current and deeply respected religious way of thinking. The basis for this inter-connection can be stated in a succinct way: in.. (shrink)

Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’de 1963 ile 2012 yılları arasında din psikolojisi alanında yapılan ve hala devam eden yüksek lisans ve doktora tezlerine ilişkin analizler yer almaktadır. Bunun yanında din psikolojisinin Türkiye’de akademide yer alışına dair kısa bir tarihçe vardır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, din psikolojisi doktora tezlerine ilişkin bir bibliyografya oluşturarak, araştırmacılara ve lisansüstü öğrencilerine bir katalog sunmaktır. Ayrıca, tezlere ait verilerin analizleriyle, yapılacak yeni çalışmalara yol göstermek amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem olarak literatür taraması yapılmış, farklı kurumların katalogları taranmış ve alandaki akademisyenlerle görüşülmüştür. Elde (...) edilen bilgiler doğrultusunda tezler, yüksek lisans ve doktora tezleri olarak tasnif edilmiş ve yazar referans alınarak alfabetik sıraya göre dizilmiştir. Tez başlıklarının içerdikleri konular tespit edilmiş ve bu veriler analiz edilmiştir. (shrink)

Post-classical period witnessed intense debates on aspects of the Avicennan theory of science. Among them one set of discussions concerned the issue of subject matter (mabāhith al-mawdūʿ) in a science. They were raised by Ṣadr al-Sharīʿa (d. 747/1346) in the introduction of his al-Tawḍīh, a commentary on his legal theory text al-Tanqīḥ. Therein, he raised three questions: (1) whether the subject matter of a science can be multiple, (2) what restricting subject matter of a science means, and (3) whether one (...) thing can be the subject matter of multiple sciences. Taftāzānī (d. 792/1390), a proponent of the Avicennan theory, objected to Ṣadr al-Sharīʿa’s positions in his al-Talwīḥ, the most well-known supercommentary on al-Tawḍīh. The paper analyzes this debate on the issue of subject matter in sciences, and thus sheds light on the reception of an important aspect of the Avicennan theory of science in the postclassical period. (shrink)

Analogy among characters is not the only structural device which blurs the boundaries of the self. The very repetition of the act of narration, involving a chain of quotations, makes the story a perfect example of what Jakobson calls "speech within speech"1 and divorces the various characters from their own discourse. In addition to the real author's speech to the real reader, crystallized in that of the implied author to the implied reader, the whole story is the speech of an (...) extradiegetic-heterodiegetic narrator who, in the footnote, calls himself "editor" and who sums up Liddell Hart's account and juxtaposes it with Yu Tsun's dictated statement. Just as the editor quotes Tsun, so Tsun, an extradiegetic-homodiegetic narrator, quotes Albert who in turn quotes Ts'ui Pên, sometimes verbatim, as in the case of the crucial letter, sometimes by conjecture, as in the instance of Pên's supposed declarations about the book and the maze. Quotation, then, is a dominant narrative mode in this story, and quotation is the appropriation by one person of the speech of another. Since a person is to a large extent constituted by one person of his discourse, such an appropriation implies, at least partly, an interpenetration of personalities. Thus both repetition through analogy and repetition through quotation threaten the absolute autonomy of the self. · 1. Roman Jakobson, "Linguistics and Poetics," in Essays on the Language of Literature, ed. Seymour Chatman and Samuel R. Levin , pp. 296-322. Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan is a senior lecturer in the department of English at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The author of The Concept of Ambiguity: The Example of James, she is currently writing on the poetics of repetition and, in collaboration with Moshe Ron, on contemporary narrative theory. (shrink)

Bu makale Aristotelesçi bilim teorisinin ve filozofların ilmî eserlere belirli konularla giriş yapma geleneğinin İslamî ilimlerin tasavvur edilmesi ve sunulmasında etkili olduğunu fıkıh usulü el kitaplarından Muhtasarü’l-Müntehâ’nın girişi üzerine yapılan tartışmalara binaen göstermektedir. Aristotelesçi bilim teorisi her ilmin konu, ilke ve meselelerden oluştuğunu ileri sürmekte, felsefî mukaddime yazma geleneği ise bir eserin konusunu, amacını ve sair belli başlı meselelerini ele alarak giriş yapma tarzını sunmaktaydı. Makale felsefî bilim teorisiyle ilmî eserlere mukaddime yazma geleneğinin, İbnü’l-Hâcib’in (ö. 646/1249) Muhtasarü’l-Müntehâ’sının girişi üzerine yapılan (...) şerh ve haşiyelerde kesiştiklerini göstermektedir. Bu metne onlarca şerh ve haşiye yazılmıştır, fakat makalede bunlar içerisinden on üç ve on dördüncü yüzyıllarda Kâdî el-Beyzâvî (ö. 691/1291-92), Ziyâüddin et-Tûsî (ö. 706/1306-7), Kutbüddin eş-Şîrâzî (ö. 710/1311), Cemâleddin el-Hillî (ö. 726/1325), Bedreddin et-Tüsterî (ö. 732/1332), Adudüddin el-Îcî (ö. 756/1355), Sa‘deddin et-Teftâzânî (ö. 792/1390) ve Seyyid Şerif el-Cürcânî (ö. 816/1413) tarafından yazılanlar incelenmektedir. İbnü’l-Hâcib’in giriş mahiyetindeki iki cümlesi üzerine yapılan yorumlar mebâdî kelimesinin ilkeler ve başlangıçlar şeklindeki -ilki bilim teorisi ikincisi ise bilimlere giriş yazma geleneğiyle ilişkili olan- iki anlamı arasındaki gerilimi göstermektedir. Makale İbnü’l-Hâcib’in Muhtasar’ı üzerine yapılan şerh ve haşiyelerdeki tartışmalar üzerinden hem fıkıh usulünün tasavvur ve sunumunun felsefî bilim teorisi ve bilimlere giriş yazma geleneği doğrultusunda olduğunu hem de bu metnin mebâdî kavramının lügavî ve ıstılahî anlamlarını kapsayacak şekilde yeniden tasavvur edilmesini tetiklediğini ortaya koymaktadır. En nihayetinde, mebâdî üzerine yapılan tartışmaların bir bilimin birlik yönünü bilmeyi temellendiren etkili bir argümanı doğurduğu, ayrıca o dönemdeki yaygın bilim teorisine karşı ilimlerin esasında üç değil tek bir öğeden oluştuğu şeklinde bir eleştiriye yol açtığı gösterilmektedir. (shrink)

The death anxiety is one of the leading existential problems. Religiosity, on other hand, plays an important role in coping with death anxiety. However, studies on the relationship between death anxiety and religiosity have revealed conflicting results. The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the relationship between religiosity and death anxiety and to identify possible causes of conflicting results. The study used a systematic review method to examine both correlational and experimental studies. The studies reviewed draw attention to (...) two important results. First, although there are generally inconsistent relationships between religiosity and death anxiety, especially intrinsic religious orientation is negatively associated with death anxiety. Second, mortality salience increases the religious beliefs of the religious while producing inconsistent results for the nonreligious. On the other hand, these studies have some critical limitations. One of these limitations, the measures of religiosity and death anxiety used in studies wide variety, and their reliability and cross-cultural validity can be problematic. Implicitly measuring religiosity and death anxiety can help solve this problem. Another limitation is that the experimental studies were very few and those that did were mostly done with participants from the Judeo-Christian religious tradition. Therefore, there is a need to conduct studies (especially experimental) from different religious and cultural traditions to overcome this limitation. The current review is essential to have better understanding the relationship between religiosity and fear of death and guiding future studies. (shrink)

In this paper, I examine several commentaries and glosses on the prolegomenon of Najm al-Dīn al-Kātibī’s (d. 675/1276–77) Shamsiyya that relate to debates on the Aristotelian and Ibn Sīnān theory of science in the postclassical period. Chief among the commentaries of the Shamsiyya is Quṭb al-Dīn al-Rāzī’s (d. 766/1365) Taḥrīr al-qawāʿid al-manṭiqiyya. This commentary, rather than the base text of the Shamsiyya, set the stage for later interpretations by Mirak al-Bukhārī (fl. 733/1332), Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Qāshānī (d. 755/1354), Saʿd al-Dīn al-Taftāzānī (...) (d. 792/1390), al-Sayyid al-Sharīf al-Jurjānī (d. 816/1413), Dāwūd al-Khwāfī (fl. 839/1465) and ʿIṣām al-Dīn Isfarāyinī (d. 945/1538). I focus on three issues that were raised in these interpreta­tions of the Shamsiyya’s prolegomenon: (1) the place of the elements of sciences in logical corpus, (2) the notion of the prolegomenon and its content, and (3) the real essence of a science. I attend to the particular debates and contentions on these issues to reveal the general idea of science at that time. (shrink)

This article contributes to the study of the globalization of science through an analysis of Ahmed Cevdet's nineteenth-century translation of the sixth chapter of Ibn Khaldun's (d. 1406) Muqaddimah, which deals with the nature and history of science. Cevdet's translation and Ottomanization of that text demonstrate that science did not simply originate in Europe to be subsequently distributed to the rest of the world. Instead, knowledge transmitted from Europe was actively engaged with and appropriated by scholars, who sought to put (...) that material within their own cultural context in a manner that could serve their own intellectual and practical needs. Cevdet's case is particularly interesting because it demonstrates that (1) Islamic conceptions of human nature, the soul and the nature of knowledge provided particularly fertile soil in which empiricist and positivist traditions could take root, and (2) aspects of modern science – specifically its ostensive separation from metaphysical debates – made it more attractive to Islamic theologians than was, for example, the work of Aristotelian philosophers. Through an exploration of Cevdet's career and a close analysis of his historiographical treatment of Ibn Khaldun's account of sciences, this article foregrounds the agency of non-Europeans in the late nineteenth-century circulation of scientific knowledge. (shrink)