The Idea of the State in Ibn Khaldun and a Comparative Study in the Context of the Debate ‘Is the State a Means or an End?’: (Ibn Khaldun-Aristotle-Thomas Hobbes)

Özet

Ibn Khaldun, who is one of the most important figures for 14th century Islamic thought, has constructed a system that is different from the approaches of his contemporaries in the world of Eastern thought and defined his field as the field of Umran (Ilm-i Umran). The thinker constructed a cyclical philosophy of history centered on human and social life by analyzing the general trends of historical events and social relations to reach general governing rules concerning the relation between system and element. built on this Umran science he also conceptualization each of the elements in question. In order to understand Ibn Khaldun’s system of thought in general and his state philosophy in particular, as he treats the state and society as two different structures in accordance with the current sociological approach and defines the formation process of both in sociological terms, it is necessary to briefly review some of the basic concepts used by the state and determined some main elements.

In the first part of our work in this framework, explanations were given to explain the concepts of Umran, Asabiyet, Bedouin and Hadarism, Riyaset and Mülk (State) which constitutes Ibn Khaldun’s thought. In terms of Ibn Khaldun’s political thought, we are trying to understand the role of life, people’s anticipation and the solidarity that leads to the emergence of the political appearance and functions of the social organization, which is at the center of state philosophy. Ibn Khaldun’s system of thought regards the elements of the state mechanism and the general functioning of people as an inevitable consequence of living together to meet some of their needs, and this influences ways of thinking about the progress of the state.

Following the state philosophy of Ibn Khaldun, we have examined the state philosophy of Aristotle and Thomas Hobbes in order to be able to develop a comparative approach to the controversial issue of “State: Means or End?” Together with the views of the two thinkers, we included a comparative assessment of this problem. Finally, we tried to share an evaluation of how we discussed and assessed the issues during the article as a conclusion.