The relationship between philosophy and music has gained different views throughout the history of philosophy. The question of how these two modes of existence, one of which is irreducible to the other, is in a relationship has always maintained its importance due to the variability in this relationship itself. Therefore, this question, like all other philosophical questions, does not have a character that can be resolved in favor of the views of a particular philosophical school or philosopher. Instead, it has to be a question that allows for different answers as perspectives from different periods in the history of philosophy are uncovered. The tradition of metaphysical philosophy, one of these perspectives, has tried to establish power over many modes of existence based on the assumption that existence can only be understood through a priori principles or mathematical certainties in mind. At this point, a question that is critical to this power almost automatically emerges: How could philosophy claim that its philosophical effort encompasses music, despite the fact that the way of existence of music transcends this effort? Moreover, if this pretentious claim of philosophy turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy, is there an action called philosophy? When we look at Ancient Greek philosophy, one of the perspectives that construct the relationship between philosophy and music, it can be said that the relationship between music and philosophy is based on a vertical way of thinking. More clearly, music has been tried to be interpreted in the context of philosophical cosmos doctrines. The most obvious place to see this situation is the philosophy of Pythagoras. In the sense of manifesting a higher reality in a lower dimension, Pythagoras' approach to music from a hierarchical point of view caused him to connect music to mathematics, which is a purely mental activity. So, the first scientific approach to music in this sense belongs to Pythagoras. The ancient doctrines of Pythagoras strongly influenced Plato's musical ideas. However, although he was influenced, it can be said that Plato developed a musical understanding that differed from Pythagoras. In Plato, music is a dangerous mode of being for philosophy. For this reason, Plato argues that music should be controlled just like poetry. One of the strategic weapons Plato uses in his struggle to control the influence of music is tradition. According to him, traditional music is purer, and its meanings are more precise and uncontaminated. Thus, it can be said that for Plato, too, the relationship between music and philosophy was handled following the vertical thinking style, which is the general characteristic of Ancient Greek metaphysical philosophy. When Plato's approach to music and Pythagoras' understanding of music are compared, it is seen that the most fundamental difference can be expressed in the concept of political concern. While Pythagoras affirmed the music without political concerns, the same cannot be said for Plato. Plato, whose whole philosophy can be read as a political philosophy, also approached music with a political concern. Thus, contrary to the absolute affirmation of Pythagoras, for Plato, music can be affirmed to the extent that it serves the functioning of the State. This is the reason why Plato brought the pedagogical aspect of music to the fore. It can be said that Plato, who approaches music conditionally, and his student Aristotle's views on music are close. Like Plato, it is seen in Aristotle that "music is considered a kind of psychological rehabilitation tool and is perceived as an activity that must be kept within the limits of political control mechanisms." Aristotle, who got closer to Plato in the context of considering music in the representation category, "differs from Plato by paying attention to the skill and artistry that has a share in the occurrence of this representation act. Another point where Aristotle differs from Plato is his approach to the concept of harmony. For Aristotle, harmony is a concrete, experiential reality rather than a metaphysical thing. Harmony is a matter of notes and rhythms rather than immaterial ideas or non-intuitive universals. However, this does not mean that Aristotle attributes autonomy to music. Despite his perspective partially separated from Plato, music still cannot come out of "the addendum category" for Aristotle. From this point of view, it is possible to say that in Ancient Greek philosophy, music was primarily evaluated in a vertical way of thinking as a reflection of the view of cosmology. Therefore it was positioned in connection with mathematics, a purely mental activity, and considered a mimetic event. Following the Aristotelian tradition, Islamic philosophy first classified the sciences as theoretical and practical and then divided the theoretical sciences into three: metaphysics, mathematics, and physics. In the philosophy of Alkindus and especially in Alpharabius' work titled "Kitab al-Musiki al-Kabir," music was conceived as a theoretical science based on mathematical principles based on the Pythagorean tradition. Especially in Alkindus' thought, music was handled in the context of a cosmic harmony theory, just like in Pythagoras, and astronomical similarities were established even with the physical structures of musical instruments, in addition to establishing the theoretical relevance of music with celestial bodies. This is because music is still seen as an event of representation. Alpharabius, on the other hand, attaches importance to the practical aspect of music, just like Aristotle, and compares the music theorist, who does not know the practice of music, to a doctor who does not have the means to perform surgery. However, for Alpharabius, music is a secondary position, far from autonomy, in the hierarchy of sciences determined and classified by philosophy. Ibn Sind. continued the musical system of Fd.rd.bi in his works. He took Alpharabius' side against the Muslim Pythagoreans in subjecting music to an appropriate theoretical study and re-examined the science of music as an auditory phenomenon. However, although the musical works of Alkindus, Alpharabius, and Avicenna seem to have surpassed the ancient Greek philosophy in many technical aspects, it can be said that classical Islamic philosophers also "handled" music with a positioning approach since they see it under the category of mathematics, which is a purely mental science. This point undoubtedly stands out as a pretentious claim of philosophy. Once db a priori principles or mathematical certainties are accepted as the only criterion in understanding existence, it is expected that all modes of existence, and in this context, music, should be unpretentious. So, what kind of reality do we encounter when we expect the unpretentiousness that philosophy expects from music from philosophy itself? At this point, it would be beneficial to speculate on the word "groundbreaking. " The first meaning of the verb "to break fresh ground," which means idiomatically "to deal with something in a new way" is "to open a new road." When we take the term "groundbreaking" out of its original meaning and think in terms of the philosophy -music relationship, this idiom offers us the opportunity to say the following: Music is a "groundbreaking" reality for the philosophical act of thinking to the dark side beyond the limits of thought. Although this aspect of music was not visible during the "golden age" of metaphysical thought, the fact that music is making philosophy talk about itself in this way today is the clearest indicator of this. As a result, this act of breaking fresh ground is a call that keeps music and philosophy in a constant relationship.
