Avicenna’s Interpretation of the Aristotelian Concept of Time
Ahmet Alperen CanAristotle characterized time as a number because he considered the earlier, later, and now being units associated with motion. In this context, the present study investigates time within the Peripatetic natural philosophy and the framework of numbered motion. However, time is a continuous quantity in the system, while numbers are discontinuous. For this reason, the concept of numbers in the definition is seen to have created the problem of discontinuity regarding questions such as how to understand time as a number, the requirement of a counting soul and relation to plurality. In fact, Aristotle accepted time as number in the sense that it is counted because it is continuous. Hellenistic commentators also tried rationalization of time as a number. The basic claim of this article is that Avicenna’s conception of time is a reconstructed version of the Aristotelian conceptualization of time. By distinguishing between the continuous and discontinuous relationships among quantities, Avicenna established time as a conceptualized quantity that can be considered both as a magnitude and a measure. Accordingly, Avicenna considered time itself is continuous due to magnitude being continuous, with numbers being added to time as accidents. In additional, he considered time to not necessitate a counting soul in terms of magnitude. This article examines Avicenna’s reconstruction of the concept of time through the use of number, magnitude, continuity, and celestial spheres.
İbn Sînâ’nın Aristotelesçi Zaman Kavramını Yorumlaması
Ahmet Alperen CanAristoteles, zamanı harekette açığa çıkan öncelik ile sonralıktan ve ânın birimler hâlinde düşünülmesinden dolayı sayı olarak betimlemiştir. Bu bağlamda Peripatetik doğa felsefesinde zaman, hareketin sayılması çerçevesinde tartışılmıştır. Halbuki bu sistemde zaman sürekli, sayı süreksiz niceliktir. Dolayısıyla tanım cümlesindeki sayı kavramı; zamanın sayı olmasının nasıl anlaşılacağı, sayının bir sayanı gerektirmesi ve çokluklarla ilişkili olması gibi hususlarda süreksizlik sorununu meydana getirmiştir. Nitekim Aristoteles, sürekli olması dolayısıyla zamanı, sayılan anlamında sayı kabul eder. Helenistik şârihler de zamanın sayı formunda betimlenmesinde, nicelikler arasında süreklilik ve süreksizlik geçişkenliğini çözmeye çalışmıştır. Bu makalenin ana iddiası, İbn Sînâ’nın zaman anlayışının, Aristotelesçi zaman kavrayışının yeniden yapılandırılmış versiyonu olduğudur. İbn Sînâ zamanı, nicelikler arasındaki sürekli– süreksiz ilişkisine karşı, öncelikle hem büyüklük hem de ölçü olarak tartışılabilen miktar kavramıyla kurar. İbn Sînâ’ya göre miktar sürekli olduğundan, zaman bizzat süreklidir; sayı ise arazî biçimde zamana eklenir. Ayrıca, miktar olması bakımından zaman, sayan nefsi zorunlu kılmaz. Bu makale, İbn Sînâ’nın zaman kavramında gerçekleştirdiği yeniden yapılandırmasını; sayı, miktar, süreklilik ve göksel küreler üzerinden incelemektedir.
Determining the similarities and differences that occurred between Avicenna and Aristotle is an important study method in the literature on the history of philosophy. In this context, Avicenna can be examined both as an Aristotelian and as an original philosopher by considering his Kitāb al-Shifā [Book of Healing]. This is also true regarding Avicenna’s view of time. Recent research on time has argued Avicenna to have defined time as a magnitude rather than a number. In particular, many texts are found to argue that Avicenna had established the nature of time based on the concept of magnitude. However, the concept of number also held a central position in his understanding of time. Therefore, the claim that Avicenna had perceived time solely as a magnitude is a challenging one. As a result, the concepts of magnitude, measure, and number as existed in Avicenna’s understanding of time also need to be considered. Whether a hierarchical relationship exists between time as a magnitude and time as a number is also worth investigating.
While Aristotle had tried to determine the nature of time through its relation to movement, he also sought ways to think of it in terms of units. Aristotle depicted the concepts of priority and posteriority to symbolize the continuity of movement. However, the use of the concept of numbers in the definition of time created the problem of discontinuity regarding categories. In this context, Avicenna’s way of constructing the concept of time can be interpreted as a restructuring by applying Aristotle’s arguments to different contexts in order to eliminate the discontinuity.
Aristotle introduced the conceptualization of time as a continuously counted entity in order to resolve the problem of continuity for numbers with time. However, Avicenna did not include the idea that time is a number in the sense of being counted in his definition. now was the understanding of time in Avicenna’s philosophy built upon the concept of numbers. Avicenna is seen to have presented an ambivalent view of the concept of time, which he had based on the concepts of magnitude and numbers. According to the philosopher, however, the former is essential while the latter represents the accidental aspect of time. While numbers constitute one aspect of time, magnitude constitutes another more important aspect of time and is the cause of the qualities that time has.
Avicenna made many different arrangements regarding the concept of time. The most important of these was the interpretation of Aristotle’s claim that there is no time when there is no soul counting through Avicenna’s use of celestial spheres and circular motion. Time performs the act of measurement through the continuity provided by cyclical motion. Therefore, time does not require a counting soul in order to exist. The celestial sphere that is the cause of the existence of time moves because of the soul, and that same soul is the perfection of the form of the celestial sphere. Although it does not have the same close causal relationship with the counting soul, the relationship Avicenna established between the soul and time can be understood in this manner.
In Avicenna’s system, numbers are replaced by magnitude, thereby downplaying the emphasis that Aristotle and Hellenistic commentators had placed on time being a number in the sense of being counted. According to Avicenna, the attachment of a discontinuous quantity to a continuous quantity is bilaterally possible. In fact, time itself is continuous in terms of quantity. Consequently, motion encompasses both numbers and magnitude, both of which are referred to as time; however, numbers correspond to the accidental aspect of time, whereas magnitude denotes its quantity. The continuity of motion and time is ensured by celestial motion, thus enabling the measurement of other motions. Therefore, Avicenna’s interpretation of the concept of time aimed to explain that attaching illusory discontinuities such as month, year, and day to time does not make it inherently discontinuous. Therefore, this study has examined the claim that adding a discontinuity to time does not make time discontinuous.
