Brethren of Purity

A group of Islamic philosophers committed to support mystical, philosophical, and historically grounded Islam and engage in informed interfaith discussions.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

Brethren of Purity:
We're a collective of followers of various schools of Islamic Philosophy and Mysticism. We've all joined together for one common purpose - to promote The Eternal Wisdom (Hikmah) and to counter a destructive force that is overtaking Islam - Wahabism/Salafism...

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

https://t.co/c0i5MEPWKZ

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@BackupYouKnow What's the point of anything? Points are always relative to goals.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

https://t.co/JzeECFvDyy

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

The irony of naïve empirical presupposition is that those who engage in it are usually those who have done nothing for the scientific pursuit, whereas there are clearly many rationalist scientists and mathematicians.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

The distinction between Ḥudūth bi-l-Zamān and bi-l-Dhāt was almost universally received in the post-classical tradition based on the initial Avicennian distinction. Here is a section from Maybudi's commentary, for example.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

https://t.co/cBxbgzQsz5

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@patronofsatan @al_Sadrai Then come and refute it.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

https://t.co/g0NrgYXkDl

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@patronofsatan @al_Sadrai No it's not. It's how historical study is done.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@patronofsatan @al_Sadrai And? Those Mullahs were Philosophers.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@patronofsatan @al_Sadrai Give an argument, not labels. Ironically, you're the one engaging in logical fallacies.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@patronofsatan @al_Sadrai There's no argument for authority. Argument authority is when it is said that something is true IN VIRTUE of being said by the authority. That's not what's being said. The argument is being provided. You're free to discuss it when the discussion begins.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@patronofsatan @al_Sadrai First of all, we're not Dawah Bros. Secondly, we can because no matter how infinite the set is, it wouldn't automatically develop the quality of self-subsistence without a part grounding it.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@patronofsatan @al_Sadrai Yes. It is. Question answers/discussion would follow after that.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@OsamaChaudharry That's the fundamental problem. Rationalism doesn't deny the value of empirical knowledge and can further appeal to intuitionist accounts, whereas it is empiricism that is limiting the field of knowledge and has no exact further justification for that.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

Empiricism itself is a philosophical dogma. It doesn't matter how many people believe in it. That would not make it rationally or philosophically justified.

[Zubair Faisal Abbasi @zubairabbasi]

@hashurtag BTW, very dated kind of discussions. World has really changed, new binaries have emerged, and empiricism has reduced space of speculation. But these people are still discussing something which is largely irrelevant.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@OsamaChaudharry Yes, it can be. Something like a simple intuitionist account, for example.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@OsamaChaudharry No, there's no equivocation. There's only the question of justification.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@OsamaChaudharry Yes, but that would still amount to the evasion of the justification, because the same question could be asked by an agonistic with respect to the question itself. Asking for justification is not a uniquely rationalist thing.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@OsamaChaudharry One is contingent upon the other, because even empirical argumentation, at its very base, requires a rationalist basis. So the question stands: what is the justification for empiricism? If the mere act of asking justification is rationalist, then sure.

[Brethren of Purity @brethrenfpurity]

@OsamaChaudharry Yes, any non-circular account would ask that.