Abu Nasr Al-Farabi is often called the “second master” after Aristotle who is the “first master”. In The Attainment of Happiness, Farabi distinguishes between four types of sciences: theoretical, persuasive, imagistic, and customary. According to him, only theoretical science—knowledge of the ‘intelligibles’ achieved through demonstration and certainty—truly grants us understanding and ultimately, happiness. The remaining three, which include the modes by which religion and political rule instruct the populace, only offer images or approximations of the truth. This distinction highlights his broader view that authority, knowledge, and happiness are linked, and that true superiority (or being “elect”) comes through the possession of superior, critically examined knowledge rather than through the acceptance of unexamined, commonly held opinions.
Farabi argues that while religious teachings—often delivered through persuasive, imagistic, or customary science—serve a political function by guiding the “vulgar” (those who rely on shared, unexamined opinions), they lack the cognitive certainty of philosophical reasoning. In Farabi’s vision, the ‘elect’, who attain genuine understanding through rigorous demonstration, are inherently happier and more capable of discerning truth. This stands in contrast to the majority, whose understanding is shaped by tradition and the images they have been presented with rather than by independently scrutinized evidence. Farabi contends that authority should rest on the firm foundation of reason and critical thought, not on inherited or imposed beliefs.
Farabi’s ideas also resonate a bit to our modern society. Farabi maintained that only a select few—the elect—could attain true understanding because they went beyond merely accepting knowledge from books or inherited traditions (they do not just believe in what the majority believes in). According to Farabi, most people rely on unexamined common opinion and absorbs ideas passively rather than engaging in the rigorous, independent experimentation or demonstration required to establish certainty. This critical engagement involves testing ideas against reality and scrutinizing them through reason and evidence. In his view, while the masses learn from established texts and narratives, they rarely question or verify these ideas on their own. As a result, only a minority—those who actively perform their own “experiments” of thought—can truly grasp the intelligibles and achieve the highest form of knowledge.
In our modern society, this distinction remains profoundly relevant. Modern governments and educational institutions often struggle with the balance between promoting widely accepted textbook knowledge and encouraging independent critical inquiry. Just as Farabi warned against the perils of relying solely on inherited beliefs, today’s debates over curriculum standards, media literacy, and scientific inquiry echo his concerns. When citizens depend only on what is presented to them (like textbook ideas, political stances, etc.) without testing or challenging these ideas through independent research or experimentation, they risk perpetuating a system where authority is granted not on the basis of critical scrutiny but on tradition and widespread acceptance. This could mean that even if the government teach us something false, we might not be able to tell it apart. This case has happened many times in history where the government purposefully not teach certain history either because they are mass genocide or hurts the government’s image.
This dynamic can also be observed in the political realm. Persuasive narratives and carefully crafted images often shape public opinion more effectively than demonstrable evidence. Farabi’s insistence on theoretical science—where knowledge is obtained through direct, experimental engagement with the world—challenges our approach to education and civic discourse today. How should we effectively preach theoretical science in today’s world and encourage everyone to doubt and experiment themselves.
Leave a Reply