A Study of Different Views of Islamic Philosophers in Critique and Reform of the Peripatetic Hylomorphism

Abstract

This article aims to review the theory of peripatetic hylomorphism and its foundations in the face of new physical perspectives (theory of Atom). For this purpose, two competing views of this theory in the history of Islamic philosophy, that is, the theory attributed to the Stoics (by Abolbarakat and Suhrawardi) and Atomism in its philosophical (small solid objects) and theology interpretations (a substance that cannot be further broken down), have been studied. Then, the approach of contemporary thinkers towards the theory of hylomorphism is examined. Furthermore, it has been shown that their views can be divided into three groups. Two groups of them have rejected the theory of hylomorphism. Furthermore, each of them has somehow supported one of its historically rival theories. Mohyeddin Elahi Ghomshei and Hassanzadeh Amoli have become interested in Atomism, and Mesbah Yazdi and Fayyazi have tended to the theory attributed to the Stoics. Others such as Fazel Touni and Allameh Tabataba’i have tried to somehow reconcile this theory with the theory of small solid objects and a new perspective on physics. Nevertheless, some of the foundations of hylomorphism theory face various philosophical and empirical challenges. Such as knowing that the body is connected, the body parts are not present, and that the prime matter (Hyle) still exists.

Keywords

• prime matter (hyle)
• corporeal form
• specific form
• body
• ibn sina
• peripatetics
• indivisible parts