When discussing the Kuzari of Halevi, Leo Strauss comments in a footnote that “One cannot recall too often this remark of Goethe (in the Noten und Abhandlungen zum besseren Verstindnis der West-ostlichen Divans): ‘Das eigentliche, einzige und tiefste Thema der Welt - und Menschengeschichte, dem alle ubrigen untergeordnet sind, bleibt der Konflikt des Unglaubens und Glaubens.’ "
It will be argued here that the influence of such a conflict on Islamic philosophy has been much exaggerated, especially by the highly influential approach that Strauss brings to such a mode of thought and its means of expression. I shall call this approach the standard interpretation because it has become standard among interpreters of Islamic philosophy. The standard interpretation recommends a program for dealing with texts of Islamic philosophy, a program that embodies a technique that must be followed if such texts are to be understood.
According to the standard interpretation, much more is required of the interpreter than just the ability to read the text and the capacity to deal with the philosophical points made in it. What is required is a key to understanding the peculiar way in which the text has been composed, and that key is to be found by paying attention to the conflict between belief and disbelief that Goethe says is so important to every cultural and historical period and to the particular form that conflict takes in a specific cultural and historical context, namely that context in which the formation of Islamic philosophy took place.
Now, the great merit of the standard interpretation is that it tries to place the text within the context from which it arose, since otherwise it is impossible to grasp what the purpose of the text is. The argument that will be presented here is not in any way opposed to such an approach, but rather is opposed to the assumption that the context is invariably one in which the conflict between religion and philosophy is of overriding importance.
[International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Dec., 1980), pp. 525-538]
Oliver Leaman is a Professor of Philosophy and Zantker Professor of Judaic Studies. He has been teaching at the University of Kentucky since August 2000, and is particularly interested in Islamic, Jewish and Eastern philosophy.". He has got his Ph.D. from Cambridge University in 1979.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Leaman
Original Title
Contra Strauss: Does the Interpretation of Islamic Philosophy Rest on a Mistake? - Oliver Leaman
When discussing the Kuzari of Halevi, Leo Strauss comments in a footnote that “One cannot recall too often this remark of Goethe (in the Noten und Abhandlungen zum besseren Verstindnis der West-ostlichen Divans): ‘Das eigentliche, einzige und tiefste Thema der Welt - und Menschengeschichte, dem alle ubrigen untergeordnet sind, bleibt der Konflikt des Unglaubens und Glaubens.’ "
It will be argued here that the influence of such a conflict on Islamic philosophy has been much exaggerated, especially by the highly influential approach that Strauss brings to such a mode of thought and its means of expression. I shall call this approach the standard interpretation because it has become standard among interpreters of Islamic philosophy. The standard interpretation recommends a program for dealing with texts of Islamic philosophy, a program that embodies a technique that must be followed if such texts are to be understood.
According to the standard interpretation, much more is required of the interpreter than just the ability to read the text and the capacity to deal with the philosophical points made in it. What is required is a key to understanding the peculiar way in which the text has been composed, and that key is to be found by paying attention to the conflict between belief and disbelief that Goethe says is so important to every cultural and historical period and to the particular form that conflict takes in a specific cultural and historical context, namely that context in which the formation of Islamic philosophy took place.
Now, the great merit of the standard interpretation is that it tries to place the text within the context from which it arose, since otherwise it is impossible to grasp what the purpose of the text is. The argument that will be presented here is not in any way opposed to such an approach, but rather is opposed to the assumption that the context is invariably one in which the conflict between religion and philosophy is of overriding importance.
[International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Dec., 1980), pp. 525-538]
Oliver Leaman is a Professor of Philosophy and Zantker Professor of Judaic Studies. He has been teaching at the University of Kentucky since August 2000, and is particularly interested in Islamic, Jewish and Eastern philosophy.". He has got his Ph.D. from Cambridge University in 1979.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Leaman
When discussing the Kuzari of Halevi, Leo Strauss comments in a footnote that “One cannot recall too often this remark of Goethe (in the Noten und Abhandlungen zum besseren Verstindnis der West-ostlichen Divans): ‘Das eigentliche, einzige und tiefste Thema der Welt - und Menschengeschichte, dem alle ubrigen untergeordnet sind, bleibt der Konflikt des Unglaubens und Glaubens.’ "
It will be argued here that the influence of such a conflict on Islamic philosophy has been much exaggerated, especially by the highly influential approach that Strauss brings to such a mode of thought and its means of expression. I shall call this approach the standard interpretation because it has become standard among interpreters of Islamic philosophy. The standard interpretation recommends a program for dealing with texts of Islamic philosophy, a program that embodies a technique that must be followed if such texts are to be understood.
According to the standard interpretation, much more is required of the interpreter than just the ability to read the text and the capacity to deal with the philosophical points made in it. What is required is a key to understanding the peculiar way in which the text has been composed, and that key is to be found by paying attention to the conflict between belief and disbelief that Goethe says is so important to every cultural and historical period and to the particular form that conflict takes in a specific cultural and historical context, namely that context in which the formation of Islamic philosophy took place.
Now, the great merit of the standard interpretation is that it tries to place the text within the context from which it arose, since otherwise it is impossible to grasp what the purpose of the text is. The argument that will be presented here is not in any way opposed to such an approach, but rather is opposed to the assumption that the context is invariably one in which the conflict between religion and philosophy is of overriding importance.
[International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Dec., 1980), pp. 525-538]
Oliver Leaman is a Professor of Philosophy and Zantker Professor of Judaic Studies. He has been teaching at the University of Kentucky since August 2000, and is particularly interested in Islamic, Jewish and Eastern philosophy.". He has got his Ph.D. from Cambridge University in 1979.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Leaman