The Potentiality-Actuality Theory in Avicenna

Fevzi Yiğit

Article Details

The Potentiality-Actuality Theory in Avicenna

Authors:

Fevzi Yiğit

Publisher:

Yozgat Bozok University

Main Topics:

Sistematik Felsefe (Diğer)

Journal:

Bozok Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.26 Issue 26, pp.43-66

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

12/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001337974

pISSN:

2458-9934

Keywords:

Abstract:

 This study is significant as it focuses on the potentiality-actuality theory, a fundamental issue in philosophy. The potentiality-actuality theory is known and highly useful as a philosophical explanatory method. Our aim is to increase awareness of how this theory, developed by Aristotle, was addressed by Avicenna, a leading philosopher of Islamic philosophy. Thus, Aristotle and Avicennas views on the concepts of potentiality, actuality and motion will be examined in detail. Aristotles distinction between potentiality and actuality is actually a metaphysical form of explanation and can be seen as an original interpretation of Platos participation in ideas idea. However, unlike Platonic thought, in Aristotelian thought, the physical universe is accepted as truly actualized. Since Avicenna also accepted the reality of the physical universe, he gave credence to this theory. Although the theory is widely used due to its results, it is quite difficult to understand due to its references to fundamental issues such as existence, non-existence, matter, form, being, and the relationship between God and the world, which form the basis of metaphysics. For example, this is demonstrated by Mullā Sadrās important intervention and correction regarding the occurrence of motion in essence. The article reached the following conclusions: First, the theory of potentiality-actuality has a secondary function in Avicennas philosophical system. This shows that he is a Neoplatonist philosopher. Accordingly, although issues such as matter, form, before and after, and motion are addressed in his philosophy, theories such as being, essence, necessary possibility, cause, and effect are primary issues. Perhaps this is why Avicenna did not directly open a chapter on the subject in the book al-Ishārāt wa al-tanbīhāt. Another possible reason for this is that Avicenna constructed his entire philosophy not only on the physical universe but also on the metaphysical universe. Namely, according to Avicenna, the actualized universe is metaphysical, while the potential universe is physical. Accordingly, the potentiality-actuality theory does not appear to be a strong enough explanatory form for the emergence of the concrete universe from the abstract universe, but it is quite successful as an explanatory form for the ascent from concrete to the abstract. Although not at the foundation of the emanation theory in Neoplatonic philosophy, the potentiality-actuality theory is used in the explanation of the theory. Again, this theory is an important tool for proving Gods existence as much as it explains motion through its possibilities. For instance, Nasīr al-Dīn Tūsī states that one of the greatest benefits of learning philosophy is proving Gods existence through the potentiality-actuality theory. This theory is also an important tool for solving the problem of evil. However, we will focus on the theory itself rather than its results. It can be said that this study will fill an important gap at least at the article level.

 This study is significant as it focuses on the potentiality-actuality theory, a fundamental issue in philosophy. The potentiality-actuality theory is known and highly useful as a philosophical explanatory method. Our aim is to increase awareness of how this theory, developed by Aristotle, was addressed by Avicenna, a leading philosopher of Islamic philosophy. Thus, Aristotle and Avicennas views on the concepts of potentiality, actuality and motion will be examined in detail. Aristotles distinction between potentiality and actuality is actually a metaphysical form of explanation and can be seen as an original interpretation of Platos participation in ideas idea. However, unlike Platonic thought, in Aristotelian thought, the physical universe is accepted as truly actualized. Since Avicenna also accepted the reality of the physical universe, he gave credence to this theory. Although the theory is widely used due to its results, it is quite difficult to understand due to its references to fundamental issues such as existence, non-existence, matter, form, being, and the relationship between God and the world, which form the basis of metaphysics. For example, this is demonstrated by Mullā Sadrās important intervention and correction regarding the occurrence of motion in essence. The article reached the following conclusions: First, the theory of potentiality-actuality has a secondary function in Avicennas philosophical system. This shows that he is a Neoplatonist philosopher. Accordingly, although issues such as matter, form, before and after, and motion are addressed in his philosophy, theories such as being, essence, necessary possibility, cause, and effect are primary issues. Perhaps this is why Avicenna did not directly open a chapter on the subject in the book al-Ishārāt wa al-tanbīhāt. Another possible reason for this is that Avicenna constructed his entire philosophy not only on the physical universe but also on the metaphysical universe. Namely, according to Avicenna, the actualized universe is metaphysical, while the potential universe is physical. Accordingly, the potentiality-actuality theory does not appear to be a strong enough explanatory form for the emergence of the concrete universe from the abstract universe, but it is quite successful as an explanatory form for the ascent from concrete to the abstract. Although not at the foundation of the emanation theory in Neoplatonic philosophy, the potentiality-actuality theory is used in the explanation of the theory. Again, this theory is an important tool for proving Gods existence as much as it explains motion through its possibilities. For instance, Nasīr al-Dīn Tūsī states that one of the greatest benefits of learning philosophy is proving Gods existence through the potentiality-actuality theory. This theory is also an important tool for solving the problem of evil. However, we will focus on the theory itself rather than its results. It can be said that this study will fill an important gap at least at the article level.

 This study is significant as it focuses on the potentiality-actuality theory, a fundamental issue in philosophy. The potentiality-actuality theory is known and highly useful as a philosophical explanatory method. Our aim is to increase awareness of how this theory, developed by Aristotle, was addressed by Avicenna, a leading philosopher of Islamic philosophy. Thus, Aristotle and Avicennas views on the concepts of potentiality, actuality and motion will be examined in detail. Aristotles distinction between potentiality and actuality is actually a metaphysical form of explanation and can be seen as an original interpretation of Platos participation in ideas idea. However, unlike Platonic thought, in Aristotelian thought, the physical universe is accepted as truly actualized. Since Avicenna also accepted the reality of the physical universe, he gave credence to this theory. Although the theory is widely used due to its results, it is quite difficult to understand due to its references to fundamental issues such as existence, non-existence, matter, form, being, and the relationship between God and the world, which form the basis of metaphysics. For example, this is demonstrated by Mullā Sadrās important intervention and correction regarding the occurrence of motion in essence. The article reached the following conclusions: First, the theory of potentiality-actuality has a secondary function in Avicennas philosophical system. This shows that he is a Neoplatonist philosopher. Accordingly, although issues such as matter, form, before and after, and motion are addressed in his philosophy, theories such as being, essence, necessary possibility, cause, and effect are primary issues. Perhaps this is why Avicenna did not directly open a chapter on the subject in the book al-Ishārāt wa al-tanbīhāt. Another possible reason for this is that Avicenna constructed his entire philosophy not only on the physical universe but also on the metaphysical universe. Namely, according to Avicenna, the actualized universe is metaphysical, while the potential universe is physical. Accordingly, the potentiality-actuality theory does not appear to be a strong enough explanatory form for the emergence of the concrete universe from the abstract universe, but it is quite successful as an explanatory form for the ascent from concrete to the abstract. Although not at the foundation of the emanation theory in Neoplatonic philosophy, the potentiality-actuality theory is used in the explanation of the theory. Again, this theory is an important tool for proving Gods existence as much as it explains motion through its possibilities. For instance, Nasīr al-Dīn Tūsī states that one of the greatest benefits of learning philosophy is proving Gods existence through the potentiality-actuality theory. This theory is also an important tool for solving the problem of evil. However, we will focus on the theory itself rather than its results. It can be said that this study will fill an important gap at least at the article level.

 Bu çalışma felsefenin temel konularından birisi olan kuvve-fiil teorisi hakkındadır ve bu yüzden önem arz etmektedir. Felsefî bir izah yöntemi olması açısından kuvve-fiil teorisi tanınmakta ve oldukça işe yaramaktadır. Çalışmamızın amacı Aristotelesin geliştirdiği bu teorinin İslâm felsefesinin kurucu filozoflarının başında gelen İbn Sînâda nasıl ele alındığını ortaya koyarak bilinirliğini artırmaktır. Bunun için Aristoteles ve İbn Sînânın kuvve, fiil ve hareket kavramları hakkındaki görüşleri ayrıntılı olarak incelenecektir. Aristotelesin kuvve ve fiil ayrımı aslında metafizik temelli bir izah biçimi olup Eflâtunun idealardan pay alma fikrinin orijinal bir yorumu olarak görülebilir. Ancak Eflâtuncu düşünceden farklı olarak Aristoteles düşüncesinde fizik evren gerçek anlamda fiiliyat kazanmış olarak kabul edilmektedir. İbn Sînâ da fizik evrenin gerçekliğini kabul ettiğinden bu teoriye itibar etmiştir. Teori, sonuçları itibarıyla çok kullanılmasına rağmen metafiziğin temelini oluşturan varlık-yokluk, madde-sûret, varoluş, Tanrı-âlem ilişkisi gibi temel meselelere dair referansları açısından anlaşılması oldukça zordur. Örneğin Molla Sadrânın cevherde hareketin gerçekleştiği yönündeki önemli müdahale ve düzeltmesi bunu göstermektedir. Makalede şu sonuçlara ulaşılmıştır: Öncelikle kuvve-fiil teorisi, İbn Sînânın felsefî sisteminde ikincil bir işleve sahiptir. Nitekim bu noktada onun Yeni Eflâtuncu bir filozof olduğu görülür. Buna göre onun felsefesinde madde-sûret, önce-sonra ve hareket gibi meselelerle beraber ele alınsa da varlık-mahiyet, zorunluluk-imkân, illet ve malul gibi teoriler birincil meselelerdir. Belki de bu yüzden İbn Sînâ İşaretler ve Tembihler kitabında konuya doğrudan başlık açmamıştır. Bu durumun muhtemel nedenlerinden biri de İbn Sînânın bütün felsefesini sadece fizik evren üzerine değil aynı zamanda metafizik evren üzerine inşa etmiş olmasıdır. Şöyle ki İbn Sînâya göre fiilî olan metafizik evren iken kuvve hâlinde olan fizikî evrendir. Buna göre kuvve-fiil teorisi soyut evrenden somut evrenin çıkmasında yeterince güçlü bir izah biçimi olarak görünmez iken somuttan soyuta yükselişte oldukça başarılı bir izah biçimi görümündedir. Yeni Eflâtuncu felsefede sudûr teorisinin temelinde olmasa da teorinin izahında kuvve-fiil teorisinden faydalanıldığı görülür. Yine bu teori sahip olduğu imkânlar vasıtasıyla hareketi izah ettiği kadar Tanrının varlığını ispatlamada da önemli bir araçtır. Örneğin Nasîrüddîn Tûsî, felsefe öğrenmenin en büyük faydalarından birisinin kuvve-fiil teorisi vasıtasıyla Tanrının varlığını ispatlamak olduğunu söyler. Ayrıca bu teori, kötülük probleminin çözümü için önemli bir vasıtadır. Ancak burada teorinin sonuçlarından çok teorinin kendisi üzerinde yoğunlaşmaya çalışılacaktır. Çalışmanın en azından makale seviyesinde önemli bir boşluğu dolduracağı söylenebilir.

Article Details

The Potentiality-Actuality Theory in Avicenna

Authors:

Fevzi Yiğit

Publisher:

Yozgat Bozok University

Main Topics:

Sistematik Felsefe (Diğer)

Journal:

Bozok Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.26 Issue 26, pp.43-66

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

12/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001337974

pISSN:

2458-9934

Islamic Philosophy

Avicenna

Potentiality

Actuality

Motionİslâm Felsefesi

İbn Sînâ

Kuvve

Fiil

Hareket.

Issues

Article Details

Authors: Fevzi Yiğit

Publisher: Yozgat Bozok University

Main Topics: Sistematik Felsefe (Diğer)

Journal: Bozok Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.26 Issue 26, pp.43-66

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 12/2024

Document Language: Turkish

Document ID (Org No.): 2001337974

pISSN: 2458-9934

Issues

Authors:

Fevzi Yiğit

Publisher:

Yozgat Bozok University

Main Topics:

Sistematik Felsefe (Diğer)

Journal:

Bozok Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.26 Issue 26, pp.43-66

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

12/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001337974

pISSN:

2458-9934