Re: "Names"
Question:-
What is an Islamic Framework? relationship between names and labels and "the thing out there" within this framework? Further, what is the significance of "all the names" in
"And He (Allah)taught Adam the Names (qualities), all of them; (Quran 2:31)?
Comment:-
The verses in the Quran are there for us to ponder and meditate on. That is what one must do, but the results one arrives at cannot be stated with dogmatism or certainty and there are undoubtedly much more meaning in them than one has reached.
Given these qualification, I propose the following:-
(1) Firstly we must differentiate between Allah's Word and Human language. Allah's Words refer to:-
(a) the creative forces in the Universe (3:47, and
(b) the Truth (6:74) or Order contained in things by reason of which they exist and, therefore, also
(c) the communicating causal forces between things by which things affect each other (7:54, 65:12).
Human words have a restricted application within the Universal scheme, but are a reflection of it. We have three stages:- (i) The real events,(ii) the experiences of it, (iii) the verbal description of the experience. The three are not identical, but the experiencing human being mediates between the Real and Lingual and this will depend on the quality of the person. But the experience always covers an area which smaller than the real and the description covers an area that is smaller than the experience. We can illustrate this by three concentric circles marked D within E within R.
The experience is true if it corresponds to the real, and description is true if it corresponds to experience that corresponds to the real. Language refers to the third level. It is
(a) a means of capturing the event in thought.
(b) of consciously interacting with reality and processing the experience and attaining self-modification
(c) a medium of communication by which human beings affect each other.
(2) The "names" refer to the attributes of Allah - 7:180
(3) These names refer to certain fundamental ideas called "categories of thought" or "archetypes" by which we interpret experiences and give them meaning. - They must exist before we can interpret the data of experience.
(4) They refer to the ability to form concepts by abstraction by which thinking takes place. They are not sensations as given by the sense organs, and not memories or images, nor perceptions, which are interpretations arrived at by associations of sensations with previous experiences. They are a third stage in data processing. This allows processing to continue to further stages of synthesis such as ideation, systematisation, integration etc.
(5) The names also refer to the ability to give labels to concepts. This includes the ability to translate what is abstract into something concrete, that we can see or hear and which acts as a medium through which we can transmit experiences, thoughts, concepts, and ideas. This also allows us to record experiences so that they can be transmitted unchanged over time.
(6) All this allows the accumulation of experiences and further processing of it. This facilitates development and evolution.
(7) Quran 2:31 should probably also be read in association with the following:-
"Then He fashioned him and breathed into him of His spirit, and made for you the faculties of hearing, and sight and hearts (feeling); little is it that you give thanks." 32:9
"Would you wrangle with me over names which you have named, you and your fathers, for which no warrant from Allah has been revealed? Then await the consequences, lo! I too am waiting." 7:71
"And We never sent a messenger save with the language of his folk that he might make the message clear for them. Then Allah sends whom He will astray, and guides whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Wise." 14:4
"N.U.N. By the pen and that which they write therewith, thou (Muhammad) art not, for thy Lord's favour unto thee, a madman.."68:1-2
"Read: In the name of thy Lord who creates, creates man from a clot. Read: And thy Lord is the most Bounteous, Who teaches by the pen, teaches man that which he knew not. Nay, but verily man is rebellious that he thinks himself independent." 96:1-7
The point appears to be that man has within him, as potentialities, the divine attributes, including creativity and responsibility, and that we should be vicegerents and behave objectively as agents of Allah. The general capacity for Language is part of this and is a built-in feature of man, though the specific words and grammar have to be learnt. We should not invent concepts or ideas through fantasy and desire, but stick to real concepts about Allah made, principles, objects and events, though there are a variety of ways in which this can be expressed. That is differences in the form of the words, which we assign to things does not matter, but we must think of the objects or events they refer to. There are different kinds of conceptual systems and ways of formulating things, as demonstrated by the various Messengers, and they are still valid as long as we understand their reference and significance.
To continue with a view of language compatible with Islam:-
As we do not directly know the real objects or experience other people's experiences, how do we know what is true or not?
There are three ways of interacting with the real world:-
(a) The processing of the data obtained through the senses.
(b) Indirectly, through language and verbal reasoning.
(c) Through direct gnosis. This could be the result of the fact that a human being has direct access to his own system - body, mind and spirit - and, therefore, to the materials, forces, processes and laws that govern these and all things that directly affect his system. A kind of resonance or empathy is set up between his own system and other things.
These correspond roughly to what the Quran calls:-
Ain-ul-Yaqin . (Quran 102:7) - The Eye of Certainty. Experiential knowledge.
Ilm-ul-Yaqin. (Quran 102:5) - The Lore of Certainty.
Haqq-ul-Yaqin (Quran 69:51) - The Truth of Certainty.
We have the following levels:-
(1) All things in the Universe interact with others. The object exists within an objective system S(O), and its properties depend on the interactions it has with the other objects in its environment.
(2) An object O1 affects other objects O2 etc, including human beings, through a medium M. such as Gravity, Light etc. The effect in man can be at an unconscious, sub-conscious or conscious level. When it is at a conscious level we call it an experience. At the conscious level, the experience is interpreted within a system of experiences S(E), which is not the same as the objective system. It is a percept. The experience E depends on the nature of the object O, the medium M and the nature of the mind of the observer P.
(3) The experience E is translated by the observer P into a description D. The description is done within a lingual or conceptual system S(D), which is a social medium of communication. This system is not the same as the system of experiences or the objective system. However, words and symbols are also experiences and there a part, a sub-system of the system of experiences.
Consider an event or object O, which is experienced by two observers P1 and P2 as E1 and E2 respectively, and they apply the description D1 and D2 to it respectively. Then D1 relates to E1 and D2 relates to E2. Because the observers cannot experience what the other experiences or know how the other understands a word, then there cannot be any agreement between them about either E or D. There is an agreement only if D1 and E1 relate to O and E2 and D2 also relate to O. It does not matter then how people experience things and how they understand words. In order to experience each will have to translate the forces (e.g. light, the medium of communication coming from the object into experiences. In order to communicate these experiences they have to translate these into a description using a language system. P1 will have to encode his experiences in a system of signs (in speech or writing), transmit this to P2 who must decode it into his own experiences. These experiences will only correspond if the same words D are associated with O.
But there is no direct communication between what one person experiences and another. If these two persons live in the same environment where X exists and learn the same language S(D) then P1 will learn to associate O with E1 and D1, while P2 will learn to associate O with E2 and D2. There will be a correspondence between the relationships O, E and D in the minds of P1 and P2. But this does not mean that their experiences are identical. If, however, they are not in the same environment and do not learn the same language in contact with it, then there will not be an understanding between them. In fact, even if there is, the two may process their experiences differently. This will apply both to the direct experience of the object and of the words.
Problems arise because language can be used in three ways.-
(a) Like all other experiences the sound or sight of words can arouse their own reactions that may be intellectual, emotional or physical. These may be conditioned reflexes. Slogans etc. have this effect and produce mindless reactions. On the other hand it is possible to use this mechanism to produce and reinforce useful associations and experiences.
(b) Language forms a separate system. The meaning of words arises from all the associations the labels have. Intelligent communication is based on meanings.
(c) Language can be used symbolically in that a phrase or story refers to a pattern of experiences. The words do not have a literal meaning, which refers to specific things, but to something abstract and much more universally true or at a deeper level. They can, through a kind of resonance, bring into consciousness or connect it to the sub-conscious fundamental patterns or archetypes.
When two people P1 and P2 communicate, then P1 can point to the object O and utter the label D. He experiences O as E1(O) and the label as E1(D) and these are connected. He experiences himself as E1(P1) and the other as E1(P2) and sees that they resemble each other outwardly and in behaviour. Thus E1(P1) and E1(P2) correspond. P1 infers that because P2 has the same behaviour as P1 and can give the same expression to his experiences as P1 then the inner state and experiences of P2 correspond to that of P1. In other words, there is a correspondence between E1 and E2. As the world experienced by P1 contains P2 as well as objects O that are external to P2, he also infers that there is a world W outside himself, so that W contains O, P1 and P2.
P2 has two experiences E2(O) and E2(D) which are also connected. He experiences P1 as E2(P1) and himself as E2(P2). He sees that these resemble each other. So E2(P1) and E2(P2) correspond. And he also infers that E1 corresponds to E2. He also infers that there is a World outside himself. Note that this could not be inferred until P1 and P2 communicated and described their inner experiences to each other. So, the three things, the world W, the observers P and their descriptions D are linked and mutually support each other.
If we draw a circle to denote the experiences of a person P1, then within this circle there is not only the object and the other person and the label, but also himself. This consists of his body, its actions as well as the associated inner experiences. The same is true for P2.
Since there is a connection between the object, the label and the persons for each person and this can be repeated, both observers infer that there is a similar connection for the other. Person P1 can encode his experiences E1 into D (because it corresponds to E1(D) and send it to person P2. P2 receives it and decode it into E2 (because it corresponds to E2(D). So though P1 and P2 do not have each other's experiences, communication is true if E1(D) is the same as E2(D), and experience E2 corresponds to E1, and E2 relates to O as E1 relates to O. The object O itself is never known, nor the observer P, nor are the experiences identical. What is known is only the relationship between P and E.
Problems arise when something is referred to which is not an object to which one can point. This may be a concept or the experience of another person. It becomes necessary to learn to use the language in the same conditions by the same actions. Work in the same laboratory with the same equipment and methods will be required. The same education and training will have to be provided. This, of course, applies to science, as well as Commerce, Politics, Philosophy, Art and also religion. In general, there is little understanding between these various groups unless of course they also undertake each others disciplines and environments.
----------<O>----------