How progressive was Al-Kindi’s philosophy compared to Western contemporaries?

First I have to start of saying, that I liked the second session a lot better than the first.

The only real contemporary I could find is John Scotus Eriugena, “John the Scot”. He lived from 815-877 CE. Al-Kindi lived from 800-873 CE, so they lived in the same time.

God and religion are big topics in Al-Kindi’s philosophy. In “On First Philosophy” he identifies god as the “first truth” in his “first philosophy” . This is closely related to the Aristotelian idea of being, as Al-Kindi sees a close relation between truth and being. In “On First Philosophy” he goes on to try and prove that god is the ultimate cause of all being.

John the Scot wrote “On Divine Predestination”, in which he reasons, that if revelation and reason should ever stand in conflict, one should prefer reason. The Catholic Church didn’t like that idea much.

Al-Kindi practices a very god-centred Aristotelian philosophy, while John the Scot’s philosophy was Neoplatonist. I find that Al-Kindi seems pretty hung up on his religious beliefs, but I can’t tell if a god-centred philosophy is less progressive. What I think though is that questioning you own beliefs can lead to new fresh ideas.

I think that this weeks session was really interesting and less hung up on a long debate, that was highly misunderstood from both sides, arguing the same point from different perspectives. And in the end nothing mattered, but that everyone should try to be as tolerant as they can. I felt like I learned a lot more this week, although I really liked the debate.