Author
Nesrin Bağcı Erciyas
Publication Place
University of Afyon Kocatepe -
University of Afyon Kocatepe
Subject
Pluralism, Religion
Type
kitap
Language
Arabic
Digital
Yes
Manuscript
No
Library
Leitir Library
Library Asset ID
EISSN: 2757-8399, DOI: 10.52637/kiid.1332107
Record ID
cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_64c1bf51adfe42bc97ac290db0e3f922
Library Location
DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)
Notes
The subject of this article is the comparison of Farabi and John Hick's religious conceptions in terms of pluralism. The purpose of this article is to compare the religious views of these two thinkers, even though they lived in different times and belonged to different religious traditions, and to show their aspects that are compatible with religious pluralism. Both thinkers define humans as living creatures with social and religious aspects. Farabi uses the concept of religion, or as he calls it, nation, in the sense of a social and political system. According to Farabi, religions are divided into two as virtuous or non-virtuous (ignorant) according to whether they aim to reach "ultimate happiness", which is the purpose of human existence. All religions established to serve a purpose other than ultimate happiness, which is the purpose of human existence, are religions without virtue. There are various religions without virtue. If a religion aims at a goal other than happiness, or a worldly good such as wealth or fame, it is without virtue. Likewise, a religion established by a first president who believed that he was aware of the truth, even though he was not aware of it, is a perverted and therefore a non-virtuous religion. Although it seems to aim at achieving ultimate happiness on the surface, the religion established in the background to serve to realize another worldly goal of the ruler is also a virtuous religion based on deception. Virtuous religion, on the other hand, is the religion in which it is aimed for those who follow it to reach ultimate happiness. The truth, which is unique in this religion and reached through theoretical philosophy, is expressed symbolically in accordance with historical and cultural conditions. Therefore, there can be more than one virtuous religion. For John Hick, religion is the phenomenological answers given to the Ultimate Reality (The Real), which is the object towards which human "ultimate concern" is directed, and recorded in the historical and cultural reality. In this sense, religions are equal as responses to the noumenal ultimate Reality insofar as they can transform humans from "self-centeredness to truth-centeredness" despite the diversity and multiplicity of reality. The religious conceptions of Farabi, who advocates a rational realist epistemology regarding truth, and Hick, who advocates a critical realist epistemology, are in a different position from each other. However, despite these different positions, both thinkers' religious views seem to support a pluralistic approach to the phenomenon of religious diversity, rather than "exclusivism", which accepts a single religion as true and falsifies all others, or "inclusivity", which accepts a single religion as true and all religions other than it as true in proportion to their compliance with this accepted religion. The basis of the comparison we aim between both systems of thought is the approach that supports this pluralism. For Hick, pluralism is the most plausible response to the fact of religious diversity, and Hick established and defended religious pluralism as a theory in his works. For Farabi, this is not the case. There is no theory established as religious pluralism in Farabi's system of thought. But for Farabi, the multitude of virtuous religions that are based on theoretical philosophy and are its symbolic expression is a fact. Because people have various potentials due to their existence and are at various levels accordingly. The truth must be expressed in a way appropriate to the levels of people at these various levels, and these people must be directed to ultimate happiness, which is their purpose of existence, in accordance with their levels. This is achieved by expressing the truth reached through theoretical philosophy in a symbolic expression in accordance with the historical and cultural situation of each society, and by directing those who follow the virtuous religion to actions that will lead them to ultimate happiness. This will naturally result in the existence of more than one virtuous religion, which Farabi clearly expresses in his theory. In this respect, Farabi's vision of religion is different from the pluralism defended by Hick, who regards all religions as different historical and cultural views of the Ultimate Truth, which is the transcendent ultimate truth, but we believe that it can be considered pluralist in the sense of the diversity and equality of virtuous religions as different symbolic views of the same truth.
Detaylı Başlık
Farabi ve John Hick’in Din Tasavvurlarının Çoğulculuk Açısından Mukayesesi
