المنطق في نقد المنطق : دراسة في كتاب الرد على المنطقيين لابن تيمية

Abstract EN

This research paper is concerned with Ibn Taymiyyah's critique of Peripatetic logic and his categorical rejection thereof, because, from his perspective, the rules governing this logic are baseless or, if based, they will be on incorrect bases.

The topic of the present study is Ibn Taymiyyah's critique of the two pillars of (Peripatetic) logic, namely, conceptions and assents; the paper will highlight two aspects of his criticism : ways of internalizing conceptions and assents and his argument « roughly translated as : Neither the smart needs logic nor «لا يحتاجه الذكي ولا ينتفع به البليد the dull benefits therefrom.

The aim of the research is to prove that Ibn Taymiyyah in his book, namely alle Responding to Logicians, essentially rejected logic.

He was logical in his stand as he based his views on logical grounds not on the basis of addressing an opponent by the language he/she understands.

In his arguments, his point of departure was not the discourse made by logicians, but his system of beliefs which he attributes to them and which, later, the present research proves it as being inaccurately attributed.

The methodology followed to validate the present study hypothesis is distributed among three sections : the first, accounts for the critique of perceptions which stands, in fact, as a logical text in language based on an argument claimed by no logicians; the second, deals with the critique of assents where Ibn Taymiyyah does not differentiate formally between the name of the argument and its essence; and, the third is concerned with the analysis of Taymiyyah's aforementioned argument.

From the researchers point of view, the study concludes with the validating the research hypothesis.