Realities Are Established: Truth, Correspondence and Essence
Read-only question overview. Answers and scoring remain inside authenticated learner attempts.
- What does “ḥaqāʾiq al-ashyāʾ thābitah” chiefly affirm?
- Which initial premise underlies reasoning from the observable world to the Creator?
- Which correctly distinguishes a thing from its property?
- What follows from seeing a mirage?
- What is the presented definition of al-ḥaqq?
- What makes “it is raining here today” true?
- Which term is given as the contrary of al-ḥaqq?
- Which statement correctly assesses a false report?
- What is an attested scope of use for al-ḥaqq?
- Ṣidq is especially common in connection with what?
- Which is the sound relation between ḥaqq and ṣidq?
- How is the perspective of correspondence distinguished?
- What is the counterpart of al-ṣidq?
- What cannot be inferred just from imagining a building?
- What question is central to māhiyyah?
- What is meant by “mā bihi al-shayʾ huwa huwa”?
- In the classical definition “rational animal,” what is nāṭiq?
- How do laughing and writing differ from human essence?
- What does knowing a quiddity not necessarily establish?
- How do “who is this person?” and “what is a human?” differ?
- What follows from combining contradictory descriptions in a phrase?
- What kind of claim is “al-shayʾ ʿindanā huwa al-mawjūd”?
- How are thubūt, taḥaqquq, wujūd and kawn treated here?
- Why might the thesis seem tautological?
- What is the core response to the tautology objection?
- Why is the speaker’s confidence not enough for ḥaqq?
- A mistaken observation proves that no external realities exist.
- Both al-ḥaqq and al-ṣidq can concern correspondence to reality, though their perspectives differ.
- A person’s not writing at a particular moment does not remove their essential humanity.
- Forming a mental conception necessarily proves that a corresponding external object exists.