IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pkp/hassle/v2y2014i3p149-162id751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing and Contrasting the Concept of the Intellect between Classical Muslim Philosophers with Modern Cognitive Psychologists: A Definitional Reflection

Author

Listed:
  • Ssuna Salim
  • Syahrul Faizaz Abdullah

Abstract

The concept of the intellect greatly attracted Classical Muslim Philosophers and still attracts the attention of the Modern Cognitive Psychologists as well. A lot of scientific as well as non-scientific studies and researches have been carried out; unfortunately, this concept is still one of the most misunderstood concepts of human nature. The study presented and analyzed the opinions of the two groups, emphasizing their definition and understanding of what the intellect is, and what it entails, this culminated into a critical analysis of its relationship to knowledge production and acquisition. This is a qualitative study and it utilized textual analysis methodology. The study noted sharp differences in the definition and understanding of the intellect between Classical Muslim Philosophers whose understanding was mainly based on the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet, (pbuh) while Modern Cognitive Psychologists understanding was mainly based on personal opinions, observations and reasoning. The study views that this concept will continue to be misunderstood and vaguely defined since it is abstract in nature, a better and a sound understanding can be reached through authentic revealed knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Ssuna Salim & Syahrul Faizaz Abdullah, 2014. "Comparing and Contrasting the Concept of the Intellect between Classical Muslim Philosophers with Modern Cognitive Psychologists: A Definitional Reflection," Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, Conscientia Beam, vol. 2(3), pages 149-162.
  • Handle: RePEc:pkp:hassle:v:2:y:2014:i:3:p:149-162:id:751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://archive.conscientiabeam.com/index.php/73/article/view/751/1063
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pkp:hassle:v:2:y:2014:i:3:p:149-162:id:751. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dim Michael (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://archive.conscientiabeam.com/index.php/73/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.