Argumentation in the Risale-i Nur

1. Argumentation in the Risale-i Nur Graduate Conference on Nursi Studies Bilal Kuspinar

2. Epistemological Evaluation of Arguments • Reason-based (Nazar-i aqli) • Conceptualization (Cognitive-Perception) • Common notions and ideas, universal, timeless, necessary truths • Syllogistic (Deduction, Induction, Analogy) • Demonstrative (Burhan)

3. Epistemological Evaluation of Arguments • Revelation-based (Wahyi) • Scriptural (Qur’anic) (Wahy-i Matluw) • Prophetic (Wahy-i Ghayr-i Matluw)

4. Epistemological Evaluation of Arguments • Authority-based (Transmitted) • Individual • Consensus

5. Epistemological Evaluation of Arguments • Experimental - Sensory (Hissi) • Experiential –Self-developed (Tajrubi)

6. Epistemological Evaluation of Arguments • Heart-centered (Hadsi and Kashfi) • Internalization (Intuitive-Perception) • Conscience (Vicdan) or Primordial Disposition (Fitrat) • Illuminative (Ishraqi) • Intuitive (Ilhami or Sezgi or Hads) • Unveiling (Kashf) • Witnessing (Mushahada)

7. Epistemological Evaluation of Arguments • Epistemological Analysis of Technical Terms in the Risale • Munazara (Argumentation or argumentative debate) • Adab-i munazara (Etiquettes of Argumentation) • Munaqasha (Disputation or polemical dispute)

8. Epistemological Evaluation of Arguments • What are the stated/unstated objectives of the author? • What do they aim to establish/prove/demonstrate/defend? • Or do they aim to criticize/repudiate/refute? • What types of arguments does the author employ? • What kinds of method/approach does he adopt? • What do the proposed arguments deal with? • How are the arguments constructed? • Metaphysical, Epistemological, Ethical, etc., implications

9. What is Argument? • A discussion involving different points of view • A process of reasoning; series of reasons stated for a purpose or a position • A statement, reason, or an evidence or fact for or against a point

10. Components of an argument? • A sequence of statements called premises; • some give reason(s) to accept another statement, called conclusion. • Initial or preparatory statements: premises • Resulting statement(s): conclusion • Arguments classified: • Weak and/or bad: poor and not convincing • Strong and/or good: cogent, persuasive, straightforward

11. Validity or Accuracy of Arguments • The premises logically entail the conclusion. • The accuracy or validity of a conclusion : • depends on the strength and correctness or precision of the premises. • Logic deals with the question of validity: • If the premises are true , the conclusion is accepted. • A valid argument with true premises leading to an acceptable conclusion is called sound. • If the premises are accepted, logically the conclusion is to be accepted. • If the conclusion is rejected, logically one or more of the premises are to be rejected.

12. Forming premise & proposition • Premise & Proposition: • A well-connected series of statements intended to establish a definite claim • The building block of a logical argument • A deliberate attempt to move beyond just making an assertion • Giving good reasons about what you are asserting • Informational content of assertion or claim • To qualify as a proposition: • Statement must be capable of being true or false

13. The meaning of an argument in academic essay • Taking a position on one side of a controversial issue • Arguing a point or a thesis • Questions to be always asked: • Why is it my argument important? • How can it help others to understand what I aim to convey? • What can I learn from it?

14. Basic components of an argument in academic essay • A claim or a position • Put forward or affirm • Evidence or the details • To support the claim • Definition and description of terms • To familiarize the reader with the meanings of the technical terms employed in the essay • Consideration of counter-arguments or opposing claims • To show how your claim is true against possible counter claims

15. Constructing a sound argument • Premises: • Formulating explicitly propositions • Inference: • Moving from one or more accepted propositions to a new one • Conclusion: • Arriving at another proposition from the accepted one through a valid inference

16. Methods of Inference • Deductive: • Deriving a conclusion by analyzing generally-accepted (or valid) arguments • The derived conclusion: implicit in the proposed arguments • Inductive: • Deriving a (general) conclusion by analyzing many individual instances • Eliminating possibilities (or impossibilities) • Analogy: • Comparing and contrasting two similar instances

17. Process of Analyzing Arguments • Identify the explicitly stated and/or the implicitly alluded objectives of the proposed arguments • Identify the nature of arguments (experiential, empirical, scriptural, intuitive, moral, traditional, transcendental, etc.) • Grasp and understand the meanings of the terms used in the arguments (in their context) • Determine the methods of inference • Assess the accuracy and relevance of the evidences, as well as their internal and external consistency • Form your opinion or judgment

18. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Cosmological • Ontological • Teleological • Moral • Argument from Conscience • Arguments from Experience • Argument from Information (based on science, history, etc) • Argument from Authority

19. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Cosmological: • Based on the existence of contingent things • Based on the assumption that there was a first event preceding all prior events. • A posterior • How to explain the series of events taking place in the universe as a whole? • Arriving at the conclusion that there is a sufficient reason [and cause] for every contingent fact and event. • Because contingent things do exist, there must also exist a Necessary Being, i.e. God.

20. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Cosmological: • Demonstrate the impossibility of infinite causes • Eliminating the possibility of an infinite series of events • Eliminating the impossibility of two necessary beings Discussions on: -Is the Necessary Being a voluntary agent? -Did He will to choose to create and not to create the world?

21. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Cosmological: • Discussion on: • Is this world the best of all possible worlds? • Why should this world be as it is? • Commonly-accepted: • God must choose the best of all possible worlds. • If God could choose otherwise, He would be less than perfect. • But His Essence contains all perfections. (Ghazali, Suhrawardi, Leibniz and Nursi)

22. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Ontological: • Based on the nature of the concept of God • A priori • Based on a definition of “a necessary being as one whose essence includes existence” • God: Being that contains all perfections • “Existence is perfection; therefore, God must exist.” • (Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, Descartes, Mulla Sadra, Spinoza)

23. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Ontological: • Nursi’s version: • Based on not on the concept of God but the Names and Qualities of God • To prove the Existence of God through His Names and Qualities; Perfection of His Names • E.g. Perfect wisdom, Perfect knowledge, and Perfect power, etc.

24. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Teleological: • Purpose that is evident in things points to a Cause (God) • who is able to give such purpose to them • Argument from design • Design of the universe: • calls for a Grand Intelligent Designer • Every designer has a designer. • The Universe manifests design. • Therefore, the universe has a designer. • (St. Thomas Aquinas)

25. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Teleological: • Nursi’s version: • Argument from Pre-established or pre-ordained Justice and Harmony • Grand Book: Cosmos full of all tangible and intangible signs, imprints , and reflections of God’s Names • Microcosm: Human’s infinite potentialities • An inherent orderliness in the cosmos and in all creation • This inherent orderliness or justice can only be accounted for as the work of God’s Name, All-Wise and Just. • Laws of Nature: Laws of God (Sunnatullah)

26. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Moral: • Based on the assumption that there are objectives moral laws • Moral Laws: • Originate from a moral lawgiver • Therefore, a lawgiver exists. • (Kant’s concept of moral duty: • Moral duty means that God exists. • God is the Highest Good (moral duty) • Therefore, we human beings pursue God.

27. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Moral: • Discussion on: • Who communicates to human being right and wrong? • Moral Intelligence through the manifestation of the universal moral law. • Laws in the Universe and in the Human Nature

28. Philosophical/Theological Arguments • Argument from Conscience: • The source of morality felt in the human conscience. • Can you deliberately disobey your conscience? • What or who tells us to do or not to do? • Conscience • Arguments for Fitra (Primordial Disposition) and Wijdan (Conscience) in the Risale-i Nur

29. Analysis of Arguments in the Texts • “The essential nature (wijdan or fitra) of beings does not lie. The inclination to grow in a seed declares: “I shall sprout and produce fruit!” It speaks the truth. • In an egg is the desire for life; it says: “I shall be a hen!” and this comes about, with Divine permission. It speaks the truth. • Due to the inclination to freeze, a handful of water says: “I shall take up more space!” and unyielding iron cannot give it the lie; the rightness of its words splits the iron. • These inclinations are the manifestations of the creative commands proceeding from Divine Will.”(The Damascus Sermon / Seeds of Reality - p. 99)

30. Analysis of Arguments in the Texts • “Of necessity everyone perceives in himself a will and choice; he knows it through his conscience. • To know the nature of beings is one thing; to know they exist is something different. • There are many things which although their existence is self-evident, we do not know their true nature... The power of choice may be included among these. • Everything is not restricted to what we know; our not knowing them does not prove the things we do not know do not exist.” (The Words / Twenty-Sixth Word, p. 480)

31. Analysis of Arguments in the Texts • “Everything from the cells of an animate body, the red and white corpuscles in the blood, the transformations of minute particles, and the mutual proportion and relation of the body’s organs, to the incomings and outgoings of the seas, the income and expenditure of springs under the earth, the birth and death of animals and plants, the destruction of autumn and the reconstruction of spring, the duties and motions of the elements and the stars, and the alterations, struggles and clashes of death and life, light and darkness, and heat and cold, are ordered and weighed with so sensitive a balance, so fine a measure, that the human mind can nowhere see any waste or futility, just as human science and philosophy see everywhere and point out the most perfect order and beautiful symmetry. Indeed, human science and philosophy are a manifestation and interpreter of that order and symmetry.” (Lem’alar, 30, p. 800; The Flashes, 30, p. 401)