Ibn Khaldun Today

The article "Ibn Khaldun as a Social Holist Philosopher" presents a compelling exploration of the philosophical underpinnings of Ibn Khaldun's social theory, particularly through his concept of Asabiyyah . The author situates Ibn Khaldun within the broader discourse of social holism, drawing comparisons between his ideas and those of Ferdinand Tönnies, as well as with key thinkers in the Western tradition such as Aristotle, Marx, and contemporary philosophers like Philip Pettit. Through this comparative analysis, the paper asserts that Ibn Khaldun offers a rich, nuanced perspective on human sociality that bridges Islamic and Western philosophical traditions. Central to the article is the thesis that Ibn Khaldun’s social philosophy, specifically his concept of Asabiyyah , offers a form of social holism that emphasizes the interdependence of individuals within a community. The paper begins by framing social holism in contrast to social atomism, the latter asserting that in...

Ali Çaksu’s 2017 article “Ibn Khaldun and Philosophy: Causality in History,” published in the Journal of Historical Sociology , offers a compelling and nuanced examination of Ibn Khaldun’s engagement with philosophical traditions—particularly Aristotelian causality—and his innovative adaptation of these concepts within his philosophy of history. By focusing on the role of causation in Ibn Khaldun’s magnum opus, the Muqaddimah , Çaksu challenges reductive interpretations that label Ibn Khaldun a mere Aristotelian or a passive inheritor of Greek thought. Instead, the article presents him as an original and dynamic thinker who synthesized philosophical, theological, and empirical insights to construct a historically grounded science of civilization ( ‘ilm al-‘umrān ). Çaksu’s central thesis is that while Ibn Khaldun was deeply informed by the Aristotelian doctrine of the four causes (material, formal, efficient, and final), he significantly transformed this framework to suit the contingen...

by Sayeda Akhter, PhD, Md. and Ashif Hasan Razu ABSTRACT:  This paper presents a comparative analysis of the contributions of Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century Arab scholar, and Auguste Comte, a 19th-century French philosopher, to the development of sociology. While Auguste Comte is widely acknowledged in the Western tradition as the “father of sociology,” Ibn Khaldun’s seminal work, “Muqaddimah”, place the Preliminary work for a systematic approach to social and historical analysis several centuries before Comte. Ibn Khaldun’s pioneering ideas on social cohesion, economic foundations, and the cyclical nature of civilizations challenge the conventional Eurocentric narrative that places the origins of sociological thought exclusively within Western intellectual history. This paper examines the methodologies, theories, and socio-historical contexts that shaped the works of both thinkers. Ibn Khaldun’s empirical observations and his concept of “asabiyyah” (social cohesion) are compared with...

Soumaya Mestiri’s essay, “Public Debate, Shûra, (Overlapping) Consensus, Ijma’: Toward a Global Concept of Democracy,” published in the UNESCO volume Asian-Arab Philosophical Dialogues on Globalization, Democracy and Human Rights (2010), offers a compelling critique of both Eurocentric and Islamist exceptionalisms regarding democracy. Situating her argument within a broader effort to pluralize democratic theory, Mestiri draws on classical Islamic concepts—particularly shûra (consultation) and ijma’ (consensus)—to demonstrate the latent democratic potential within Islamic intellectual traditions. Her central thesis challenges the notion that democracy is exclusively a Western inheritance and asserts that a global, culturally plural conception of democracy must be forged through cross-cultural philosophical dialogue. Mestiri begins by deconstructing the “Islamic exception” thesis—the idea that Islam is inherently incompatible with democracy. She rightly critiques both Western orientalist...

By Nathaniel Schmidt Ibn Khaldun would not have understood the statement that he was the founder of sociology rather than of scientific history. He regarded himself as the discoverer of the science of history precisely because he conceived of history as the science dealing with all the social phenomena of man's life. He would have strenuously objected to any such separation. What he had so laboriously put together, let no man put asunder. What would have been the use of his persistent efforts to show that his new science had for its object all aspects of human society, not only the rise and fall of states, defeats and victories in war, the exploits of generals and armies, diplomacy and peace treaties, and the various forms of political government, but all the occupations of men, trades and commerce, arts and sciences, philosophy and religion, and all the factors producing this varied social life, if the vast additions he had made to the province of history were to be taken away and...