dc.contributor.author |
Nesan, Pulenthiran |
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2019-01-10T06:46:31Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2019-01-10T06:46:31Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2018-11-29 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
5th International Symposium. 29 November 2018. Faculty of Islamic Studies and Arabic Language, South Eastern University of Sri Lanka, Oluvil, Sri Lanka, pp. 89-95. |
en_US |
dc.identifier.isbn |
978-955-627-135-5 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://ir.lib.seu.ac.lk/handle/123456789/3448 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
The historical scholars describe the middle age as the dark period. During this period there were no
development in the literature, arts, culture, civilization thought and living standard. This middle age
period lasted from the fall of Romanian empire (A.C 5th century) and white revival period (15th century).
There were no improvement in people’s thoughts for about ten centuries. The world was immersed in
religion without any scientific thoughts. This research analysis the ideology thoughts of Imam Al
Ghazali, one of the most predominant Islamic philosopher lived in the medieval philosophy. The main
problem in this research is to find out how the philosophical knowledge is possible in the medieval
philosophy period. Hypothesis of this research are re-birth of Greek Thoughts, Islamic Philosophy was
contributed to Renaisance, Ghazali expressed wisdom via skepticism.The aim of this research are
examirify the contribution of Islamic philosophy and analysing the ways of obtaining knowledge
through Ghazali’s thoughts. The secondary data were collected from magazines, research papers, and
other related articles. The collected data were analysed using descriptive analysis method. |
en_US |
dc.language.iso |
en_US |
en_US |
dc.publisher |
Faculty of Islamic Studies and Arabic Language, South Eastern University of Sri Lanka. |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Middle age |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Philosophy |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Ghazali |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Skepticism |
en_US |
dc.title |
Imam Al Ghazali’s ‘skepticism and rationalist thought’: a philosophical analysis |
en_US |
dc.type |
Article |
en_US |