{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"1370","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1370,"authors_free":[{"id":1562,"entry_id":1370,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":966,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Richard C. Taylor","free_first_name":"Richard C.","free_last_name":"Taylor","norm_person":{"id":966,"first_name":"Richard C.","last_name":"Taylor","full_name":"Richard C. Taylor","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139866353","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/49247370","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Richard C. Taylor"}}],"entry_title":"Ibn Rushd\/Averroes and \"Islamic\" Rationalism","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"Ibn Rushd\/Averroes and \"Islamic\" Rationalism"},"abstract":"The classical rationalist philosophical tradition in Arabic reached its culmination in the writings of the twelfth-century Andalusian Averroes whose translated commentaries on Aristotle conveyed to the Latin West a rationalist approach which significantly challenged and affected theological and philosophical thinking in that Christian context. That methodology is shown at work in his Fasl al-Maq\u0101l or Book of the Distinction of Discourse and the Establishment of the Relation of Religious Law and Philosophy (c. 1280), although the deeply philosophical character of his subtle arguments has gone largely unappreciated. Here the philosophical foundations for his reasoning are exposed to reveal key elements of his rationalism. That approach is confirmed in his assertion in his later Long Commentary on the Metaphysics (c. 1290) that the highest worship of God is to be found first and foremost in the philosophical science of metaphysics rather than in the rituals of religion. ","btype":3,"date":"2009","language":"English","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":31,"category_name":"Metaphysics","link":"bib?categories[]=Metaphysics"},{"id":39,"category_name":"Theology","link":"bib?categories[]=Theology"}],"authors":[{"id":966,"full_name":"Richard C. Taylor","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1370,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Medieval EncountersAl-Andalus, Sepharad and Medievela Iberia. Cultural Contact and Diffusion","volume":"15","issue":"2","pages":"225\u2013235"}},"sort":["Ibn Rushd\/Averroes and \"Islamic\" Rationalism"]}

{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"837","_score":null,"_source":{"id":837,"authors_free":[{"id":1001,"entry_id":837,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":966,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Richard C. Taylor","free_first_name":"Richard C.","free_last_name":"Taylor","norm_person":{"id":966,"first_name":"Richard C.","last_name":"Taylor","full_name":"Richard C. Taylor","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139866353","viaf_url":"https:\/\/viaf.org\/viaf\/49247370","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Richard C. Taylor"}}],"entry_title":"The Agent Intellect as \"form for us\" and Averroes's Critique of al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b","title_transcript":null,"title_translation":null,"main_title":{"title":"The Agent Intellect as \"form for us\" and Averroes's Critique of al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b"},"abstract":"This article explicates Averroes's understanding of human knowing and abstraction in this three commentaries on Aristotle's De Anima. While Averroes's views on the nature of the human material intellect changes through the three commentaries until he reaches is famous view of the unity of the material intellect as one for all human beings, his view of the agent intellect as 'form for us' is sustained throughout these works. In his Long Commentary on the De Anima he reveals his dependence on al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b for this notion and provides a detailed critique of the Farabian notion that the agent intellect is 'form for us' only as agent cause, not as our true formal cause. Although Averroes argues that the agent intellect must somehow be intrinsic to us as our form since humans are per se rational and undertake acts of knowing by will, his view is shown to rest on an equivocal use of the notion of formal cause. The agent intellect cannot be properly our intrinsic formal principle while remaining ontologically separate.","btype":3,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":null,"doi_url":null,"ti_url":null,"categories":[{"id":12,"category_name":"Psychology","link":"bib?categories[]=Psychology"},{"id":28,"category_name":"al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b","link":"bib?categories[]=al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b"}],"authors":[{"id":966,"full_name":"Richard C. Taylor","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":837,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"T\u00f3picos. Revista de Filosof\u00eda","volume":"29","issue":null,"pages":"29\u201351"}},"sort":["The Agent Intellect as \"form for us\" and Averroes's Critique of al-F\u0101r\u0101b\u012b"]}