ALFARABI and ARISTOTLE
(THE FOUR CAUSES and THE FOUR STAGES OF THE DOCTINE OF THE INTELLIGENCE)
Alfarabi was raised as a young boy in Baghdad. His early life was spent studying the
art of linguistics, philosophy, and logic. His teachers were Syrian Christians experts
in Greek philosophy. He studied Aristotle and Plato in detail, and it became evident in
his later writings that they were a strong influence on him. He became quite a prolific
writer, and he wrote more than 100 works, many of which have unfortunately been lost
including his a lot of his commentaries on Aristotle. He was one of the earliest Islamic
thinkers to transmit to the world of his time the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle. He is
considered by many to be the founder of an authentic philosophy. His writings created a
lot of support, debate, and controversy. He contributed materials on the proof of the
existence of the First Principle, and on the theory of emanation, as well as the theory
of knowledge, in addition to his commentaries on Greek philosophers.
The Greek influence is clearly present in his works, especially with his Opinions of the
Inhabitants of a Virtuous City, where he laid down a philosophical, religious, and social
system for the humanity at large; a system that sought to break barriers and facilitate
relations among people and nations. This work sounded very similar to the work presented
by Plato in Plato's Republic. They both took into consideration the matter of
city/state, who was to govern, who was to be governed, how this governing was to take
place, how it was to be enforced, and so on. It also appears clear that he was influenced
greatly by Aristotle. This influence is present in his "Doctrine of the Intellect". The
Doctrine of the intellect was Alfarabi's approach to giving his own interpretation to the
intellect.
There are strong similarities between Alfarabi's Doctrine of the Intellect and
Aristotle's "Four Causes". Needless to say that they each are comprised of four stages,
but the stages seem very similar, they seem to be representative of one another, almost
to the point of defining one another. It will be demonstrated that Alfarabi used
Aristotle's "Four Causes" to derive and support the Doctrine of the Intellect. Alfarabi
draws off of Aristotle's distinction among four causes; material, formal, efficient, and
final. An object's "material cause" is the substance out of which it is made, the "formal
cause" is its shape or nature, its "efficient cause" is the most immediate force to bring
it into existence, and its "final cause"is its purpose. Thus the Doctrine of the
Intellect's "material cause" is latent thought, it's "formal cause" is the active
thought, it's "efficient cause" is conscience thought of one's mind, and it's "final
cause" is to rationalize everything and to be able to make the first transition to the
last spiritual emanation from God.
The first cause of Aristotle was called "material" or natural matter. Aristotle borrowed
this from the early Greeks. The main question asked by this cause is: "By what is
anything made of?" Alfarabi embraces this cause and relates it to the Doctrine of the
Intellect as his first stage. The stage in which describes the capability for thinking.
Alfarabi argues that this is latent thought, similar to a dry sponge, that is ready to
absorb quiddities or whatness. This is the preconscience grabbing of forms, allowing for
no differentiation of thought, reason, or abstract sensing. Therefore the essence of one,
is the same thing as the essence of other objects. This requires mind and form. The mind
sees the forms and collects them merely as forms. Here with Aristotle the first stage is
a gatherer. The mind, though not defined what it is, is defined by the function that it
has.
The second cause for Aristotle was called "formal" or life force. Aristotle borrowed
this form from Plato. The main question asked by this cause is: "What is it's identity or
what is its name?" This is also the second stage of the Doctrine of the Intellect for
Alfarabi. Alfarabi considers this to be the active stage where the sponge is filled with
objects. As the objects enter it the process of abstracting out forms begins. This brings
on the concept of dualism, once again supplying a strong Greek influence from Plato. The
forms are in us, we collect the forms and the objects. The forms are contributing to our
thought process, latent to active, dried to wet, the dried sponge is now latently wet.
There is no real thought process yet, this is simply just the gathering stages.
This is the differentiation between forms and objects. The forms are in us, this is not
a consideration of time and space, but rather a consideration of universals. Universals
like blue, red, hot, cold, the forms are quazzi things. Object for the object of thought.
Things that are recognized as separate. Here with Aristotle we begin to get some
separation of the objects, images, and forms. We begin to see differences.
The third cause for Aristotle was called "efficient" or natural process. Aristotle
borrowed this concept from Democritus. The main question asked by this cause is: "Who
changed it from nothing to something, so that it is the way it is?" This concept allows
for absence, starting with nothing and now having something. This is the thinking of
itself, similar to the squeezing of the sponge. The actual actualizing and using the
forms. Thinking about the forms, and the forms that were not abstracted from the objects.
These ideas and concepts belong to us, they are in us. This is our mind at work, at this
stage it is still very active with the thought of what these forms are and begins to see
functions.
The fourth cause for Aristotle was called "final" or to achieve excellence in the city
in politics, art, athletics, war, science, or philosophy. This was Aristotle's own
contribution. The main question asked by this cause is: "What is its purpose?" For
Alfarabi this is the union of the spiritual world to the world of human beings. This is
the last emanation of God, and the first step in which man begins to embrace the
spiritual world. This is the actual reflection of man, looking upon his own thought
process, seeing how his active rational mind works. It is this rationale that allows for
the move from the first cause/stage to the second cause/stage, from the second
cause/stage to the third cause/stage, and so on. This is the stage at which true
thinking about thinking takes place. A very cognitive approach.
The only confusion that is presented by Alfarabi's doctrine is: is it really that of
Alfarabi? There seems to be contradictions in some of his views and some of the works
that have been credited to him, are not actually his. Some interpreters have come to the
conclusion that he was honestly trying to unite Islamic doctrines with philosophical
teachings. While others thought he was committed to philosophy that was based upon a
religious body that would be used mostly as a political resource.
Regardless of these interpretations, if these writings are actually those of Alfarabi,
then it is clear that there was a strong Aristotelianism influence on Alfarabi. This is
evident in several of the writings such as in his mentions of the four senses, intellect
in potentiality, intellect in actuality, acquired intellect, and with the agent
intellect. There are several other writings that are credited to Alfarabi that were based
on Plato and Aristotle, so there is no real reason to assume that these writings were not
those of Alfarabi.
It appears that Alfarabi uses the basic principles of Aristotle and has applied them to
his principles of the Doctrine of the Intellect in order to rationalize his philosophy.
Alfarabi was a philosopher that grabbed new ideas and harnessed them with some of the
greatest philosophical minds known to man. He took Aristotle to a new level, doesn't any
true philosopher? He embodied the thoughts of previous minds, and united them with his
own and became a very powerful influence on Islamic philosophy.
It is clear that Aristotle was used to develop his Doctrine of the Intellect. The
similarities, the context, and the rational are too similar to belong to anyone else.
|