Article Sidebar

Vol. 4, No. 2, March 2021
Submitted
January 12, 2023
Published
March 25, 2021
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 130 Download : 114

Main Article Content

Abstract

Epistemology is the most fundamental branch of philosophy. It discusses philosophically truth and falsehood, validity of knowledge, limits of knowledge and nature of knowledge, knower and known, etc. Defined narrowly, epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief. As the study of knowledge, epistemology is concerned with the following questions: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions of knowledge? What are its sources? What is its structure, and what are its limits? As the study of justified belief, epistemology aims to answer questions such as: How we are to understand the concept of justification? What makes justified beliefs justified? Is justification internal or external to one’s own mind? Understood more broadly, epistemology is about issues having to do with the creation and dissemination of knowledge in particular areas of inquiry. The subject matter of epistemology is the process, methods, objects, characteristics, conditions, validity, and fallacies of knowledge. It should be remembered here that epistemology uses the philosophical methods of induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis. The Greek word 'episteme' is the root of epistemology or study of knowledge. This philosophical term is commonly associated with the inquiry of truth and knowledge. The word may have few connotations. First, epistemology can be the quest for true and scientific knowledge as opposed to opinion or belief. Secondly, it may be seen as an organized body of thought about reality. In general it may be regarded that epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies knowledge. It attempts to answer the basic question: What distinguishes true (adequate) knowledge from false (inadequate) knowledge? As a philosophical enquiry, together with logic, it sharpens our quest in all other philosophical domains like metaphysics, cosmology, ethics and philosophy of God. As Aristotle said, "All men by their nature desire to know,' people understand the importance and power of knowledge in human life. From very ancient times human beings have tried to know themselves and even the many natural and supernatural forces which confront them. Human beings desire to know the world and their place and role in it. Search for knowledge is not merely for an academic requirement but an existential concern to express ourselves. As Vincent G Potter says, 'To be wise does not require that we know everything about everything, but that we know the place of things relative to each other and to ourselves. It is to know what life as a whole is about.' Accordingly, we can say epistemology assists human beings in realizing the Socratic maxim, 'Know Thyself.' This paper will provide a systematic overview of the problems that the questions above raise and focus in some depth on issues relating to the structure and the limits of knowledge and justification given much interest towards the Indian and Muslim epistemology. An attempt has also been made to discuss the epistemological issues and types of knowledge generally accepted by Indian and Muslim epistemologists.

Keywords

Epistemology Philosophy Muslim Perspective Hindu Perspective Knowledge Belief

Article Details

License
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Gul, N. . (2021). FOUNDATIONS OF INDIAN AND MUSLIM EPISTEMOLOGY: A GENERAL OVERVIEW. Indonesian Journal of Interdisciplinary Islamic Studies (IJIIS), 4(2), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.20885/ijiis.vol4.iss2.art4
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Al-Sanasleh, Hanan A., and Bassam H. Hammo. “Building Domain Ontology: Experiences in Developing the Prophetic Ontology Form Quran and Hadith.” In 2017 International Conference on New Trends in Computing Sciences (ICTCS), 223–28, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTCS.2017.35.
  2. Bakker, Hans, and Harunaga Isaacson. “The Ramtek Inscriptions II: The Vākāṭaka Inscription in the Kevala-Narasiṃha Temple.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 56, no. 1 (1993): 46–74.
  3. Bonjour, Laurence. “Can Empirical Knowledge Have a Foundation?” American Philosophical Quarterly 15, no. 1 (1978): 1–13.
  4. ———. “The Coherence Theory of Empirical Knowledge.” Philosophical Studies 30, no. 5 (November 1, 1976): 281–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00357928.
  5. Brooks, Lisa Allette. “Epistemology and Embodiment: Diagnosis and the Senses in Classical Ayurvedic Medicine.” Asian Review of World Histories 6, no. 1 (2018): 98–135. https://doi.org/10.1163/22879811-12340027.
  6. Chudnoff, Elijah. “Intuitive Knowledge.” Philosophical Studies 162, no. 2 (January 1, 2013): 359–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-011-9770-x.
  7. DeBoer, T. J. The History of Philosophy in Islam. Translated by Edward R. Jones. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 1983.
  8. Douven, Igor. “Assertion, Knowledge, and Rational Credibility.” The Philosophical Review 115, no. 4 (November 1, 2006): 449–85.
  9. Hawking, Stephen, and Leonard Mlodinow. The Grand Design. New York: Bantam Books, 2010.
  10. Horten, Max, and V. June Hager. “The System of Islamic Philosophy in General.” Islamic Studies 12, no. 1 (1973): 1–36.
  11. Hota, K.N. “‘Dharma’ in the Vaiśeṣika System.” Bulletin of the Deccan College Research Institute 68/69 (2008): 383–90.
  12. Jago, Mark. “The Problem of Rational Knowledge.” Erkenntnis 79, no. 6 (June 1, 2014): 1151–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-013-9545-1.
  13. Jha, V. N. “Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika Theory of Meaning.” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 77, no. 1/4 (1996): 281–84.
  14. Lewis, C. I. “The Given Element in Empirical Knowledge.” The Philosophical Review 61, no. 2 (1952): 168–75. https://doi.org/10.2307/2182907.
  15. Lutsyshyna, Olena. “Classical Sāṁkhya on the Authorship of the Vedas.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 40, no. 4 (2012): 453–67.
  16. Mills, Ethan. “Jayarāśi’s Delightful Destruction of Epistemology.” Philosophy East and West 65, no. 2 (2015): 498–541.
  17. Mohanty, J.M. “Oriya Literary Heritage: A Study of Religious Perception.” Indian Literature 39, no. 2 (172) (1996): 136–49.
  18. Parrott, Rodney J. “The Worth of the World in Classical Sāṃkhya.” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 71, no. 1/4 (1990): 83–108.
  19. Puligandla, Ramakrishna. Fundamentals of Indian Philosophy. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1985.
  20. Sahu, Bhairabi Prasad. “Ancient Orissa: The Dynamics of Internal Transformation of the Tribal Society.” Proceedings of the Indian History Congress 45 (1984): 148–60.
  21. Sharma, Arvind. “‘Upamana’ as a Means of Valid Knowledge in Hindu Epistemology and ‘Qiyas’ as a Source of Islamic Law.” Journal of the Indian Law Institute 23, no. 2 (1981): 255–57.
  22. Sharma, Chandradhar. A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy. Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2009.
  23. Sikander, Eric. “Interpretation, Revealed Knowledge and the Human Sciences.” Islamic Quarterly 35, no. 2 (1991): 77–97.
  24. Stroud, Barry. “Epistemology, the History of Epistemology, Historical Epistemology.” Erkenntnis (1975-) 75, no. 3 (2011): 495–503.
  25. Swaak, Janine, and Ton de Jong. “Measuring Intuitive Knowledge in Science: The Development of the What-If Test.” Studies in Educational Evaluation 22, no. 4 (1996): 341–62.
  26. Walzer, R. “Al-Fārābī’s Theory of Prophecy and Divination.” The Journal of Hellenic Studies 77, no. 1 (November 1957): 142–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/628647.
  27. Wan Othman, Wan Mohamad Nasir. “Integration of Revealed Knowledge (Naqli) And Rational Science (Aqli) in The Design of A Dental Curriculum.” Ulum Islamiyyah Journal 11 (2013): 65–77. https://doi.org/10.12816/0008074.
  28. Yao, Zhihua. “Dignāga and Four Types of Perception.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 32, no. 1 (2004): 57–79.