Philosophical Thought
eISSN : 0000-0000
10.5
citescore
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years
10.5
impact factor
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
pubmed
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
Embase
Biosis Preview
Volume 5, Issue 4 (2025)
J Clin Care Skill 2025, 5(4): 663-688 |
Back to browse issues page
History
Received: 2025/07/10 | Accepted: 2025/08/20 | Published: 2025/10/12
Received: 2025/07/10 | Accepted: 2025/08/20 | Published: 2025/10/12
How to cite this article
Mehrabadi K, Hasanzadeh Niri M. Validation of Naser Khusraw's Argument Rejecting the Celestial Spheres as Creator. J Clin Care Skill 2025; 5 (4) :663-688
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-6-82303-en.html
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-6-82303-en.html
1- Department of Persian Language and Literature, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabatabaie University, Tehran, Iran
| Abstract (HTML) (896 Views)
Full-Text: (10 Views)
Introduction
Naser Khusraw, in the sixth quote of his book Zad al-Musafirin, the quote And in movement and its various aspects, provides a lengthy proof, spanning seventeen pages, to refute the old popular theory of the theory of celestial management of the world [Reiner & Pingree, 2005; Rochberg, 2004; Anvari & Dadbeh, 2007]. This lengthy proof is the longest in the book and one of the most important, and it addresses many topics, either by stating them or by using them as premises to prove something. In this article, Nasir Khusraw's proof has been evaluated from both the grammatical and semantic perspectives. The criteria for grammatical or form evaluation of the proof are mathematical logic, and the standard for measuring its meaning or content is Sinological logic [Ardeshir, 2010; Lemmon, 1998; Ibn Sīnā, 2022].
The background of this research is not extensive, and there is little evidence for proof validation in Kalalm's texts [Ranjbar et al., 2013: 17-40; Fallāhī, 2010: 71-95; Mehrabadi & Hassanzadeh Niri, 2025].
The proof proposal is as follows. Find the whole text in the sixth quote of Zad al-Musafirin [Nasir Khusraw, 1962: 39-57].
Argument
Step 1. Define movement and describe its types.
Step 2. It must be shown that for forced movement, an animal stimulus is necessary.
Step 3. State that all four natures are goal-seeking.
Step 4. Explain that natural movement is forced and not a desire or wish of nature, because they are not alive and cannot move of their own essence.
Step 5. Argue that both forced and natural movements in infants are forced and, in fact, are of one essence. (That is, these two movements are alike in being forced.)
Step 6. Explain what vitality and preservation mean in individuals and across different types.
Step 7. State that only breath is capable of moving and imparting movement. Also, explain the connection of this concept to life and death.
Step 8. Describe the direction of natural movement and reiterate that the movement of each of the four temperaments is towards the center, and refute the old belief of a part moving the whole.
Step 9. State that the movement of temperaments towards the center is compulsory.
Step 10. Stating that the hypothetical center is the center of Earth's gravity.
Step 11. Stating that Earth's gravity is always in motion.
Step 12. Stating that the motion of Earth's gravity causes the hypothetical center to move.
Step 13. Concluding that the motion of natural objects is forced; not inherent.
Step 14. Provide an argument for the flexibility of the constellations and their circular motion.
Step 15. State that natural restraints prevent their movements, and these are compulsory.
Step 16. State that all bodies are of one essence; that is, they are illusions.
Step 17. State that the difference between forms requires a compulsion from another entity.
Step 18. It is concluded that the heavens do not move of their own accord and therefore are not agents.
Main Argument Line
This argument is filled with statements, lemmas, and additional explanations that do not have a direct benefit for the main argument. After setting aside the additional content, the main argument becomes clear, and we can outline three key stages for the argument's structure:
a. Natural motion is towards the center and is forced.
B. The hypothetical center is the center of Earth's gravity.
P. The firmament does not create. (The firmament has no will.)
Therefore, the statements of the main body of the argument are as follows:
A:
1. Every movement is either forced, natural, or voluntary.
2. The mover of a voluntary movement is itself.
3. Every volition is alive.
4. Natures are not alive.
5. Therefore, they have no desires.
6. Therefore, they have no voluntary movements.
7. All four temperaments tend to the center.
8. Therefore, the movement of the temperaments is not voluntary.
9. Therefore, natural movement towards the center is either natural or forced.
10. Every natural movement is forced.
11. Therefore, natural movement towards the center is forced.
B:
1. The geocenter, which is the center of gravity of the Earth, is a virtual point.
2. The Earth's gravity is always in motion.
3. The world is in balance.
4. Therefore, the motion of the Earth's gravity causes the continuous motion of the geocenter.
5. Therefore, the imaginary center point is always in motion.
C:
1. The orbits tend towards the imaginary center point.
2. Therefore, the orbits are always in motion and also curved, moving in elliptical paths around the imaginary center point.
3. Therefore, the movement of a celestial body is forced.
4. Therefore, the movement of a celestial body is due to compulsion.
5. Therefore, a celestial body does not create.
Now we will consider the form and meaning of each part separately.
Validation of the Proof
Grammar and meaning of section A.
As can be seen, this section of the proof is logically sound, and its reasoning is valid. By examining its assumptions, we find that the premises of this section of the proof consist of seven statements, which are either axiomatic or fully explained and substantiated by Nasir Khusraw to demonstrate their truth.
Grammar and meaning of section B.
The reasoning in this section is more based on physical science than logic. Nasir Khusraw always acknowledges that the center of the imaginary gravitational field of this great assembly is in motion due to the movement of its bodies and weights. This reasoning is correct even from the perspective of modern physics. Nasir Khusraw's interpretation of the central point of ambiguity is noteworthy. He states that these components are inclined toward a purely geometric entity, not a physical one, lacking substance or definition. He argues that this inclination is only towards certain abstract coordinates (and of course, continuously variable) and not towards something with a real existence. Nasir Khusraw's reasoning is equivalent to Newton's laws and aligns with the knowledge of gravitational laws in physics. He emphasizes that the center of the Earth's gravitational field is merely a location; that is, a geometric coordinate with an abstract nature and without mass. Nasir Khusraw's references to various sciences and the application of his physical and geometric knowledge in his proofs and physical understanding are evident.
Grammar and meaning of section C.
In this section of the argument, several fallacies are present. These fallacies are both from the perspective of meaning and from the grammatical point of view. First, it is claimed that the heavens are inclined towards a hypothetical central point. This statement is an assertion without any supporting reason. We should note that Nasir Khusraw, in his argument, speaks in such a way that it seems the heavens are like natures. If we do not consider the heavens as natures and assume they have a different essence, we cannot make such a judgment about them. And let's consider the heavens as natures. The judgment becomes forced and unwilling, and it is obvious from the beginning that there is nothing to prove their existence because the forced and unwilling movement of natures towards the center is an axiomatic principle. By carefully considering this point and the fact that the stated proposition is the basis for the continuation of the argument and the final inference, the essence of the argument's reasoning is essentially invalidated. Furthermore, it is claimed that the movement of the heavens, which appears due to their inclination towards a hypothetical central point, is circular. Even if we accept that the heavens are inclined and consequently move towards the center of the world, there is no reason for this movement to be circular. Then, it is said that the movement of the heavens is forced. This is also a fallacy of generalizing from a specific assumption. That the spheres have a forced motion, there is no reason for the existence or non-existence of motion or other possible forced motions.
Conclusion
One. Naser Khusraw's proof is methodical and, from a formal perspective, has a valid logical structure. Two. The premises of the proof include some presumptive and rhetorical assumptions that often stem from the author's beliefs. A number of these assumptions play a crucial role in the proof's progression. Three. From a semantic perspective, fallacies and distinctions that are far from the point are evident in the core of the argument. Four. The proof contains lemmas and peripheral materials; some are valuable and worthy of attention, while others are superfluous, making their removal from the main body of the proof possible. The second point, despite its valid logical structure, reduces the proof to mere rhetoric.
Naser Khusraw, in the sixth quote of his book Zad al-Musafirin, the quote And in movement and its various aspects, provides a lengthy proof, spanning seventeen pages, to refute the old popular theory of the theory of celestial management of the world [Reiner & Pingree, 2005; Rochberg, 2004; Anvari & Dadbeh, 2007]. This lengthy proof is the longest in the book and one of the most important, and it addresses many topics, either by stating them or by using them as premises to prove something. In this article, Nasir Khusraw's proof has been evaluated from both the grammatical and semantic perspectives. The criteria for grammatical or form evaluation of the proof are mathematical logic, and the standard for measuring its meaning or content is Sinological logic [Ardeshir, 2010; Lemmon, 1998; Ibn Sīnā, 2022].
The background of this research is not extensive, and there is little evidence for proof validation in Kalalm's texts [Ranjbar et al., 2013: 17-40; Fallāhī, 2010: 71-95; Mehrabadi & Hassanzadeh Niri, 2025].
The proof proposal is as follows. Find the whole text in the sixth quote of Zad al-Musafirin [Nasir Khusraw, 1962: 39-57].
Argument
Step 1. Define movement and describe its types.
Step 2. It must be shown that for forced movement, an animal stimulus is necessary.
Step 3. State that all four natures are goal-seeking.
Step 4. Explain that natural movement is forced and not a desire or wish of nature, because they are not alive and cannot move of their own essence.
Step 5. Argue that both forced and natural movements in infants are forced and, in fact, are of one essence. (That is, these two movements are alike in being forced.)
Step 6. Explain what vitality and preservation mean in individuals and across different types.
Step 7. State that only breath is capable of moving and imparting movement. Also, explain the connection of this concept to life and death.
Step 8. Describe the direction of natural movement and reiterate that the movement of each of the four temperaments is towards the center, and refute the old belief of a part moving the whole.
Step 9. State that the movement of temperaments towards the center is compulsory.
Step 10. Stating that the hypothetical center is the center of Earth's gravity.
Step 11. Stating that Earth's gravity is always in motion.
Step 12. Stating that the motion of Earth's gravity causes the hypothetical center to move.
Step 13. Concluding that the motion of natural objects is forced; not inherent.
Step 14. Provide an argument for the flexibility of the constellations and their circular motion.
Step 15. State that natural restraints prevent their movements, and these are compulsory.
Step 16. State that all bodies are of one essence; that is, they are illusions.
Step 17. State that the difference between forms requires a compulsion from another entity.
Step 18. It is concluded that the heavens do not move of their own accord and therefore are not agents.
Main Argument Line
This argument is filled with statements, lemmas, and additional explanations that do not have a direct benefit for the main argument. After setting aside the additional content, the main argument becomes clear, and we can outline three key stages for the argument's structure:
a. Natural motion is towards the center and is forced.
B. The hypothetical center is the center of Earth's gravity.
P. The firmament does not create. (The firmament has no will.)
Therefore, the statements of the main body of the argument are as follows:
A:
1. Every movement is either forced, natural, or voluntary.
2. The mover of a voluntary movement is itself.
3. Every volition is alive.
4. Natures are not alive.
5. Therefore, they have no desires.
6. Therefore, they have no voluntary movements.
7. All four temperaments tend to the center.
8. Therefore, the movement of the temperaments is not voluntary.
9. Therefore, natural movement towards the center is either natural or forced.
10. Every natural movement is forced.
11. Therefore, natural movement towards the center is forced.
B:
1. The geocenter, which is the center of gravity of the Earth, is a virtual point.
2. The Earth's gravity is always in motion.
3. The world is in balance.
4. Therefore, the motion of the Earth's gravity causes the continuous motion of the geocenter.
5. Therefore, the imaginary center point is always in motion.
C:
1. The orbits tend towards the imaginary center point.
2. Therefore, the orbits are always in motion and also curved, moving in elliptical paths around the imaginary center point.
3. Therefore, the movement of a celestial body is forced.
4. Therefore, the movement of a celestial body is due to compulsion.
5. Therefore, a celestial body does not create.
Now we will consider the form and meaning of each part separately.
Validation of the Proof
Grammar and meaning of section A.
As can be seen, this section of the proof is logically sound, and its reasoning is valid. By examining its assumptions, we find that the premises of this section of the proof consist of seven statements, which are either axiomatic or fully explained and substantiated by Nasir Khusraw to demonstrate their truth.
Grammar and meaning of section B.
The reasoning in this section is more based on physical science than logic. Nasir Khusraw always acknowledges that the center of the imaginary gravitational field of this great assembly is in motion due to the movement of its bodies and weights. This reasoning is correct even from the perspective of modern physics. Nasir Khusraw's interpretation of the central point of ambiguity is noteworthy. He states that these components are inclined toward a purely geometric entity, not a physical one, lacking substance or definition. He argues that this inclination is only towards certain abstract coordinates (and of course, continuously variable) and not towards something with a real existence. Nasir Khusraw's reasoning is equivalent to Newton's laws and aligns with the knowledge of gravitational laws in physics. He emphasizes that the center of the Earth's gravitational field is merely a location; that is, a geometric coordinate with an abstract nature and without mass. Nasir Khusraw's references to various sciences and the application of his physical and geometric knowledge in his proofs and physical understanding are evident.
Grammar and meaning of section C.
In this section of the argument, several fallacies are present. These fallacies are both from the perspective of meaning and from the grammatical point of view. First, it is claimed that the heavens are inclined towards a hypothetical central point. This statement is an assertion without any supporting reason. We should note that Nasir Khusraw, in his argument, speaks in such a way that it seems the heavens are like natures. If we do not consider the heavens as natures and assume they have a different essence, we cannot make such a judgment about them. And let's consider the heavens as natures. The judgment becomes forced and unwilling, and it is obvious from the beginning that there is nothing to prove their existence because the forced and unwilling movement of natures towards the center is an axiomatic principle. By carefully considering this point and the fact that the stated proposition is the basis for the continuation of the argument and the final inference, the essence of the argument's reasoning is essentially invalidated. Furthermore, it is claimed that the movement of the heavens, which appears due to their inclination towards a hypothetical central point, is circular. Even if we accept that the heavens are inclined and consequently move towards the center of the world, there is no reason for this movement to be circular. Then, it is said that the movement of the heavens is forced. This is also a fallacy of generalizing from a specific assumption. That the spheres have a forced motion, there is no reason for the existence or non-existence of motion or other possible forced motions.
Conclusion
One. Naser Khusraw's proof is methodical and, from a formal perspective, has a valid logical structure. Two. The premises of the proof include some presumptive and rhetorical assumptions that often stem from the author's beliefs. A number of these assumptions play a crucial role in the proof's progression. Three. From a semantic perspective, fallacies and distinctions that are far from the point are evident in the core of the argument. Four. The proof contains lemmas and peripheral materials; some are valuable and worthy of attention, while others are superfluous, making their removal from the main body of the proof possible. The second point, despite its valid logical structure, reduces the proof to mere rhetoric.