scholarly journals TAKDIR DAN KEBEBASAN MENURUT FETHULLAH GÜLEN

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-80
Author(s):  
Anang Haderi
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Islamic Theology ◽  
Key Terms

Abstract:Destiny and free will is one of issues in Islamic theology which is still discussed by Moslem theologian up to now. This discussion has yielded some streams with its argumentation respectively. Included who intense to discuss this issue is muḥammad Fethullah Gülen. At a glance, he offers to explain the issue in his own way without following one of the streams. He introduces some key terms, like Imām Mubīn, Kitāb Mubīn, Lauḥ Maḥfūẓ, Formal or Theoretical Destiny, actual destiny. Terms are Gülen’s exclusive. The article will elaborate the explaination of Gülen relating to the destiny and free will. The purpose is to map what is he follows the streams or he has interpretation in himself. For this reason, I will spread out briefly views of theologian before, i.e. these streams of Mu’tazili, al-Asy’arite, Matūridite Samarkand dan Matūridite Bukhārā. By this way it will be seen clearly where is the position of Gülen and what is contribution of his thinking. Abstrak: takdir dan kebebasan adalah isu teologi Islam yang masih diperbincangkan oleh para teolog hingga sekarang. Perdebatan ini telah melahirkan berbagai aliran dengan pen¬dapat¬nya masing-masing. Termasuk yang juga intens mem¬bahas isu ini adalah Muḥammad Fethullah Gülen. Sekilas, ia berusaha menjelaskan isu ini dengan caranya sendiri tanpa mengikuti salah satu aliran tersebut. Ia mengenalkan be¬berapa istilah kunci, seperti Imām Mubīn, Kitāb Mubīn, Lauḥ Maḥfūẓ, takdir formal, takdir teoritis, dan takdir aktual. Istilah-istilah ini merupakan khas Gülen. Tulisan ini akan mengelaborasi penjelasan Gülen mengenai takdir dan ke¬bebas¬an tersebut. Tujuannya adalah memetakan apakah ia mengikuti aliran-aliran teologi yang sudah ada ataukah ia mempunyai pemaknaan sendiri ter¬hadap persoalan ini. Untuk alasan ini, penulis akan me¬mapar¬kan secara singkat pendapat para teolog sebelumnya, yakni aliran-aliran Mu’tazi¬lah, al-Asy’ariyah, Mātūridiyah Samarkand dan Mātūridiyah Bukhārā. Dengan cara ini akan terlihat dengan jelas di mana¬kah posisi Gülen dan apa kontribusi dari pemikirannya itu. Keywords: Imām Mubīn, Kitāb Mubīn, Lauḥ Maḥfūẓ, takdir formal, takdir aktual.

scholarly journals Qoheleth’s Idiolect and Its Cultural Context*

2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
pp. 451-468
Author(s):  
Nili Samet
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
Semantic Fields ◽  
Time Space ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Key Terms

AbstractThe language of Qoheleth is characterized by an awkward style and an unusual vocabulary. Past studies have assigned these peculiarities to linguistic factors, assuming that the book reflects an underrepresented dialect or register. The current study aims to expand the boundaries of this discourse by introducing extra-linguistic considerations into the discussion. Qoheleth is the only biblical book that is purely philosophical, focusing on abstract issues such as the purpose of life and the problem of free will. Such philosophical discussions require the use of an abstract terminology. The basic toolkit of any philosopher consists of conceptual phrases such as “time,” “space,” “cosmos,” “humanity,” “meaning,” etc. Yet abstract vocabulary was meager in the Hebrew at the author’s disposal. Paving a pioneering way in the realm of thought, Qoheleth’s author had to create a terminological system capable of expressing his new ideas. This article traces the ways in which the need for a personally-customized philosophical idiom shaped Qoheleth’s language. Exploring the origins of eleven key-terms in the book, this article reveals the dynamics that gave rise to Qoheleth’s personal lexicon. These include generalization and conceptualization of the extant semantic fields of certain terms in order to re-invent them as personal expressions reflecting the author’s philosophy. The author takes advantage of the “linguistic availability” of certain terms, that is, their foreignness or rareness that makes them better-suited, in his view, to bear newly created meanings. Taken together, Qoheleth’s neologisms constitute a personal idiolect, carefully designed to convey the author’s unique thought.

scholarly journals THEOLOGICAL DEBATES ON ASH‘ARIYYA TENETS

ALQALAM ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 201
Author(s):  
Entol Zaenal Muttaqin
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Islamic Theology ◽  
Islamic Studies ◽  
General Explanation

There are some differences in defining Islamic theology since the era of prophet Muhammad. Some of them emerged from political aspects, and some of them are not. The two prominent ideologies in Islamic theology are Ash’ariyya derived from Sunni, and Mu’tazilla from Syi’a. One of significant scholars in 19 century, Nawawi al-bantani, wrote many books in wide Islamic studies, one of them is Fath al-Magid in theology. Many scholars wrote and designated themselves to a particular group. In contrary, although Nawawi al-Bantani confessed himself as Sunni scholar, yet in some of his writing including Fath al-Magid, he opposed Ash’ariyya and defended Mu’tazila. To some extent, this manner will come up into a unique scholarship tradition for some scholars, indeed, this research aimed to investigate this behavior in final words this paper concluded that Nawawi distanced himself from Ash’ari when he stated that God’s essence and His attributes are inseparable and thereby preserve the oneness of God. He adopted both Ash’ari’s concept, that the Qur’an is not created (ghayr makhluq and it is qadim) and Mu’tazila’s concept, that the Qur’an is created (makhluq and it is hadith). According to Nawawi, the Qur’an is created when it refers to the text and the sound, but uncreated when it refers to the underlying meaning of each verse, even if this contradicts the concept of free will that Nawawi adopted. For his last explanation, pertaining to the concept of prophecy, ru’ya and shafa’a, Nawawi provided a very general explanation, neglecting to elaborate on some important issues relating to the concept of prophecy. it is obvious that Fath al-Magid, with its different interpretation of Ash’ari’s work, meant it was similar to other Sunni theological works that aimed to modify Ash’ari’s original doctrine.

scholarly journals A Scholarly Analysis of Adl’ilahi - the Divine Justice- in the Light of the Opinions of Muslim Theologians

2018 ◽  
Vol I (II) ◽  
pp. 01-14
Author(s):  
Dr. Sayyed Hasan Askari Naqvi ◽  
Dr. Shazia Hasan
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
The Other ◽  
Apparent Contradiction ◽  
Islamic Theology ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Good Deed ◽  
Divine Justice ◽  
The Difference

This essay discusses the topic of Justice of God (‘Adl’ilahi) with reference to the issue of free will and predestination and the position of the various schools of Islamic theology regarding it. The opinion of the Mu’tazili, who believed in complete free will of man, stood opposed to that of the Asha’ira who considered the actions of men to be predetermined by Divine ordainment. The Imamia’h, on the other hand, believed in a position between these two extremes.The study further discusses the difference amongst the theologians in identifying goodness of a good deed with itself, and the evil of an evil act as inherent within it. This was the position of the Mu’tazila and the Imamia’h whereas the Asha’ira believed that it was the shari’ah that granted the goodness or evilness to any act.Finally, the apparent contradiction between the Justice of God and the presence of evil in this world is addressed and reconciled. Keywords: ‘Adl’ilahi, Mu'tazila, Asha’ira, Jafar Sadiq, Qur’an

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Alfred R. Mele
Keyword(s):  
Moral Responsibility ◽  
Free Will ◽  
Thought Experiments ◽  
Harry Frankfurt ◽  
Central Question ◽  
Robert Kane ◽  
Key Terms ◽  
Technical Terms

This chapter introduces the book’s central question: What can we learn about the nature of moral responsibility from thought experiments involving manipulation and related thought experiments featuring designed agents? Various alternative positions on that question are described, and some of the key terms of the discussion are defined, including compatibilism, determinism, incompatibilism, and libertarianism. Guidance is offered on how the author uses some other key terms, including free will, intuition, and moral responsibility. The technical terms internalism and externalism are introduced, and various kinds of internalism and externalism are distinguished. Work by Harry Frankfurt and Robert Kane is discussed to help set the stage for subsequent chapters.

Flew and the Free Will Defence

1977 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 477-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard L. Purtill
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Argument From Evil ◽  
Key Terms ◽  
Libertarian Free Will ◽  
Libertarian View

In a recent paper Anthony Flew gives an argument which can be outlined as follows:1. Any attempt to give a ‘free will defence’ (to rebut the argument from evil against God's existence) must be based either on a compatibilist notion of free will or a libertarian, incompatibilist, notion of free will.2. A free will defence based on a compatibilist notion of free will must fail, for on a compatibilist view of free will, God could make creatures who were free but never chose evil.3. A free will defence based on a libertarian notion of free will might have other difficulties, but on a libertarian view of free will God could not both leave men free and bring it about that they never chose evil.4. But a free will defence based on an incompatibilist, libertarian notion of free will can be rejected, since:(a) It is not clear that the ordinary use of such key terms as ‘action’ and ‘choice’ carry any implications of libertarian free will.(b) If such terms did carry the implication of libertarian free will it becomes hard to see how anyone could be in a position to know that a choice had been made or an action performed.(c) The possession of libertarian free will by created beings seems to be incompatible with the essential theistic doctrine that all created beings are always utterly dependent on God as their sustaining cause.5. Therefore the free will defence fails.

Job Validation Studies and Physical Agility Testing: Is the Vendor Telling You What They Think You Want or Are You Telling Them What You Need?

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
E. Randolph Soo Hoo ◽  
Stephen L. Demeter
Keyword(s):  
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ◽  
Job Analysis ◽  
Specific Work ◽  
Test Protocol ◽  
Systematic Method ◽  
Technical Standards ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Physical Abilities ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
Key Terms

Abstract Referring agents may ask independent medical evaluators if the examinee can return to work in either a normal or a restricted capacity; similarly, employers may ask external parties to conduct this type of assessment before a hire or after an injury. Functional capacity evaluations (FCEs) are used to measure agility and strength, but they have limitations and use technical jargon or concepts that can be confusing. This article clarifies key terms and concepts related to FCEs. The basic approach to a job analysis is to collect information about the job using a variety of methods, analyze the data, and summarize the data to determine specific factors required for the job. No single, optimal job analysis or validation method is applicable to every work situation or company, but the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission offers technical standards for each type of validity study. FCEs are a systematic method of measuring an individual's ability to perform various activities, and results are matched to descriptions of specific work-related tasks. Results of physical abilities/agilities tests are reported as “matching” or “not matching” job demands or “pass” or “fail” meeting job criteria. Individuals who fail an employment physical agility test often challenge the results on the basis that the test was poorly conducted, that the test protocol was not reflective of the job, or that levels for successful completion were inappropriate.

Comparative Analysis: The State of Colorado Study, Part II

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Kathryn Mueller ◽  
Douglas Van Zet ◽  
Debra J. Northrup ◽  
Edward B. Whitney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Daily Living ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Assessments ◽  
Physician Judgment ◽  
History Of ◽  
Key Terms ◽  
Causation Analysis ◽  
Work Interference

Abstract [Continued from the January/February 2004 issue of The Guides Newsletter.] To understand discrepancies in reviewers’ ratings of impairments based on different editions of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), users can usefully study the history of the revisions as successive editions attempted to provide a comprehensive, valid, reliable, unbiased, and evidence-based system. Some shortcomings of earlier editions have been addressed in the AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, but problems remain with each edition, largely because of the limited scientific evidence available. In the context of the history of the different editions of the AMA Guides and their development, the authors discuss and contextualize a number of key terms and principles including the following: definitions of impairment and normal; activities of daily living; maximum medical improvement; impairment percentages; conversion of regional impairments; combining impairments; pain and other subjective complaints; physician judgment; and causation analysis; finally, the authors note that impairment is not synonymous with disability or work interference. The AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, contrasts impairment evaluations and independent medical evaluations (this was not done in previous editions) and discusses impairment evaluations, rules for evaluations, and report standards. Upper extremity and lower extremity impairment evaluations are discussed in terms of clinical assessments and rating processes, analyzing important changes between editions and problematic areas (eg, complex regional pain syndrome).

When Mother Earth Rises Up

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 271-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Sacchi ◽  
Paolo Riva ◽  
Marco Brambilla
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Natural Disaster ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Disaster Victims ◽  
Willingness To Help ◽  
Mother Earth

Anthropomorphization is the tendency to ascribe humanlike features and mental states, such as free will and consciousness, to nonhuman beings or inanimate agents. Two studies investigated the consequences of the anthropomorphization of nature on people’s willingness to help victims of natural disasters. Study 1 (N = 96) showed that the humanization of nature correlated negatively with willingness to help natural disaster victims. Study 2 (N = 52) tested for causality, showing that the anthropomorphization of nature reduced participants’ intentions to help the victims. Overall, our findings suggest that humanizing nature undermines the tendency to support victims of natural disasters.

Free will and agency.

1994 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. A. Sappington
Keyword(s):  
Free Will
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document