چکیده:
Most theologians, whether Muslim or Christian, have sought a way through which even an imperfect understanding of God might be possible. Muslim philosophers have proposed predications of gradation (tashkik), and Saint Aquinas maintains that attributes are attributed to God by way of analogy, which is a middle ground between equivocation and univocity. This article, by referring to various sources, explains Thomas Aquinas' view on analogy and then compares it with the prevailing view in Islamic philosophy, finally subjecting it to criticism and evaluation. We will see that insisting on placing analogy under equivocation will leave the problem unsolved and the understanding of attributes will remain impossible. However, accepting a single meaning and acknowledging intensity and weakness will not leave much difference between analogy and the concept of gradation common in Islamic philosophy.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Aquinas's Analogy and its Comparison with Univocal/Equivocal Universals * Dr. Gholamhossein Tavakoli Associate Professor, Faculty of Literature, University of Isfahan Abstract Most theologians, both Muslim and Christian, have been seeking a way through which an understanding of God, however imperfect, might be possible.
Muslim philosophers have proposed equivocal predicates, while Saint Aquinas maintains that attributes are attributed to God by way of analogy, which is a middle ground between the univocal and the equivocal.
This is where Thomas distinguishes between three ways of using words: semantic analogy, such as when we call both Mars and Mercury a planet; verbal equivocation, such as when we use the word open for both a bird and a door; and analogy, such as when we say: I love a certain person, my job, or a certain food, where loving in these cases does not mean the same thing.
It must be noted that a word is applied to different things in various ways: sometimes it is applied to them in a semantic sense that is completely identical, and in these cases, it is said that the term is used with semantic ambiguity (univocity).
For this reason, Aristotle says that although the word existence has multiple meanings, nevertheless, it is not used with verbal ambiguity, but rather refers to one thing: not that it is a single concept, but rather it is something that is one as a unique and individual nature, and this is evident from the examples Aristotle has provided in the text (AQuinaS.
(
, 
, 
)
