The highest type of this theoretical knowledge, for Farabi, is wisdom (hikmah), which is ‘the knowledge of the ultimate causes of all existing entities, as well as the proximate causes, of everything caused’, by which he appears to mean ‘first philosophy’ or metaphysics and ‘second philosophy’ or physics, respectively. This double type of knowledge consists ‘in knowing that entities exist, what they are, how they are and, if many, how they culminate in an orderly fashion, in a Single Being, who is the cause of those ultimate entities, as well as the lower proximate entities’.2 Such a Being is the True One, whose subsistence (qiwa¯m) does not depend on anything else, being thoroughly self-sufficient. He is, in addition, incorporeal and His being is entirely different from the being of other entities, which do not resemble Him except in name.
Farabi gives, along Aristotelian lines, a parallel list of intellectual virtues, which includes: 1) wisdom, or the knowledge of the ultimate principles and causes; 2) practical reason, which corresponds to Aristotle’s prudence ( phronesis), already discussed; 3) reflection ( fikr), or the ability to ‘judge rightly and to discern those things which are best and most suited for what we are out to perform’, as a means of attaining happiness or something else conducive to happiness; 4) acumen (kays) or the power to discover what is best and most suitable for attaining certain subordinate goods; 5) cunning (daha¯’) or the ability to determine what is most suited for attaining a supposed good, such as wealth, pleasure or noble social standing; and 6) duplicity or deceitfulness, as the ability to discover the most effective means to achieve a base goal, deemed to be good, such as easy gain or base pleasure.10 All these virtues, which are really subdivisions of practical reason, are simply means of attaining the goal, but are different from the ultimate goal which, for Farabi, is nothing other than happiness.
The perfect state, which Farabi calls the virtuous city (al-Madı¯nah al-Fa¯dilah), is represented as the one in which humans are able to achieve the double goal of knowledge and happiness to the highest degree.
The structure of language and its relationship with thought has been considered as a problem by philosophers and logicians as well as by linguists. Farabi (d. 950), who is famous with the title of second instructor, as a system philosopher, especially in his works in the disciplines of philosophy and logic, gave a wide place to the relationship between them, starting from the nature of language and thought.
According to him, the structure of language consists of four factors: the abilities in the human soul, the vocal organs, the relation of language with nature and society, signification (sign) and compositions (compounds). One of these factors; human is the thinking / talking creature (animal-natik) which is; it is one of the faculties of the soul.
In this ability, there is a union of speaking and thinking. At the same time, Farabi evaluates this ability in terms of internal speech (internal speech), external speech (external speech) and discrimination (power of appeal). Accordingly, a relationship is established between language and thought.
In the modern period, German philosopher and linguist Wilhelm von Humboldt (d. 1835) analyzes the relationship between language and thought by using the expression “inner form”, which evokes Farabi’s “animal-natik”. According to him, the inner movements in the soul differ and are expressed by going out with the sound. When the internal form of the language and physical sounds combine, a composition is formed whose structure is not clearly known.
On the other hand, language has a relationship with thought, and language affects and shapes thought. Language is essential in order to think, that is, language is the necessary requirement of thought. In this paper, the relationship between language and thought will be investigated by focusing on Farabi’s “animal’s-natik” and Humboldt’s “inner form / inner language sense”. Keywords: Farabi, Humboldt, Thinker / Speaking Alive, Inner Language Sense
“Man differs from all animals with different characteristics; because in him there is a spirit that reveals power, that moves through the bodies of matter, and apart from that, a force that acts without matter bodies; this power is mind. The aforementioned powers include the power of nutrition, growth and reproduction, which is the task force for each of them.
Cognitive powers include external forces and inner emotion, especially imagination, predictive power, memory power, thought power and motive forces that stimulate the body, passion and hatred. Each of these forces we have mentioned acts with the help of a certain organ, otherwise there will be no work. Even one of these forces does not occur separately from matter ”. Source: Farabi, es-Siyasetü’l-Medeniyye, Translation: Commission, Ministry of Culture Pub., Istanbul, 1980, p. 2-3
Then a completely different force arises in man, thanks to him, man preserves in his soul the impressions of sensory things that he acquired with the senses in the past but are no longer given. This is the power of imagination. With this strength, man connects or separates these senses with different combinations and separations. Some of these combinations and separations are wrong (qâzib), some are true. A desire [or will] associated with these imagined objects also comes to this force and is added.
Later, the power of thought emerges in the human being, with it, the human gains the opportunity to know the mental objects, and again separates the beauty and the ugly, and creates the arts and sciences. A desire for mental things is also added to this strength. Farabi, Ideal State. ss. 65-66
Knowledge of something can be obtained by the power of the mind, the imagination, or the power of five senses. When it is desired to know something that has the property of being comprehended by mental power, the act that ensures the achievement of the desired thing arises from another power in the mental power. This is also intellectual power.
Intellectual power is the force that brings about thinking, measuring, scrutinizing, and making inferences. The mind in man is a material capability prepared to accept the imaginations of the rational.
Mind is knowing force and material mind, and at the same time knowing is powerful and mental. Knowing mind becomes actual mind when the rational arises in itself. The wise and minds become de facto rational when they are actually considered by the mind. Active Reason is the reason that makes the intellectuals the de facto rational, the know force mind, the actual mind.
Mental power is in two parts. Theoretical mind and functional mind. The function of the theoretical mind performs the verbs related to the particulars and exists to serve the theological mind. The function of the theoretical mind is to grasp the rational who are not the subject of human action. As for the mental ones; they are the first rational to be common to all humans in the sense that the whole is greater than the part and that two things belonging to one and the same thing are equal to each other.
When these intellectuals exist in a person, deep reflection, reflection, practical thinking, and the desire to explore occur in his nature. If the tendency towards what is generally perceived in human beings is the result of sense or imagination, it is called will, if it is the result of thinking and thinking and mental thinking, it is called choice (old man).
With the power of human mind, in other words, with the power of thinking, he acquires science and arts. Distinguish between good and bad acts and moral behavior. Again, with him, he understands what to do and what not to do. It also grasps the injured and the harmful, and the things that taste or pain.
We divided the power of thinking into two as theoretical and deeds above. Working power is also twofold, related to the arts and practical thinking. With good power, man knows what he will do willingly. Arts and professions are gained with the power of art. With the power of practical thinking, the things that should and should not be done are considered separately. Fârâbî, Siyasetü l -Medeniyye, Dairetü l Maarif, Hyderabad- (H) s (Translated by. Mehmet Aydın, Abdulkadir Şener, Rami Ayas. İstanbul 1980.) Medinetü l -Fazıla, p.117. (Translated by., Ahmet Arslan, Ankara-1990) Zübeyir Kars. Human – State Relationship in Fârâbî http://docplayer.biz.tr/46790432-Farabi-de-insan-devlet-iliskisi.html