التاريخ على مستوى الابستمولوجيا و المنهج عند ابن خلدون

الملخص EN

History was not a science, it was a informative narration until the anxious son of his era came, who was stung by his problems and tried to understand them and be aware of the transformations that led to him, and he who knew history and denounced the lack of criticism in it and the weakness of his style among his predecessors to set the rules for accurate criticism.

For the first time, with Ibn Khaldun, history is made into a science.

Ibn Khaldun saw the necessity in defining his position on previous historians, and in establishing the cognitive boundary between him and them so that there is no illusion that his writing history is an extension of their writing, especially since the art of history is ancient among the Ar, who knew and practiced it even before Islam, in addition to the prevailing character.

In the concept of history at the beginning was the modern character.

Ibn Khaldun was also keen to show the difference - with his predecessors - on the subject of knowledge, between being a given event, or becoming an actual physical reality by extracting the objective laws that control it.

What is the nature of the scientific leap made by Ibn Khaldun in the history of Arab thought? Where is the difference between the Khaldouni historical thought and the previous historical thought? How can a historian verify the authenticity of the news, and not transmit it until after criticism, when he lacks the tool of this criticism, which is the concept of urbanism in the necessity of its laws? © 2021 JTUH, College of Education for Human Sciences, Tikrit University