List of Articles reason

• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  1 - A Semantic Analysis of Theoretical Reason and Practical Reason in the View of Mulla Sadra
  Mohammad Javad Zorrieh Mohammad Bidhendi Jafar  Shanazari
  Given the systematic nature of his philosophy, Mulla Sadra has categorized his semantic study of practical reason and theoretical reason under the theme of philosophical psychology. Following a descriptive-analytic approach, this paper explains his views in the field of More

  Given the systematic nature of his philosophy, Mulla Sadra has categorized his semantic study of practical reason and theoretical reason under the theme of philosophical psychology. Following a descriptive-analytic approach, this paper explains his views in the field of semantics of practical and theoretical types of reason and explores their epistemological realms. Mulla Sadra believes that reason is one of the faculties of the rational soul and refers to two theoretical and practical faculties in order to clarify its functions. He maintains that, in spite of their different functions, these two faculties are, in a way, concomitant with each other. Given its role in the perception of universals, theoretical reason provides the basic concepts for morality and ethics, and practical reason perceives particular practical affairs through such basic concepts. By considering theoretical reason as the perceiver of universal concepts, Mulla Sadra introduces it as the origin of the development of two theoretical and practical types of wisdom. Regarding practical reason, neither, like some philosophers, does he consider it to be a purely practical faculty, nor, like some others, does he equate it with theoretical reason in terms of status. Rather, he believes that practical reason is capable of a kind of particular perception along with inference. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  2 - Place of Intellect in Shaykh al-Mufīd’s Kalāmī Thoughts with an Emphasis on a Critical Analysis of Existing Views
  Nafiseh  Ahl Sarmadi
  The value of reason and rational perceptions is indisputably obvious in Shaykh al-Mufīd’s view. However, it is his view of the authority of reason which is to some extent debatable. His statement as to “reason requires to give an ear to knowledge and its consequences” h More

  The value of reason and rational perceptions is indisputably obvious in Shaykh al-Mufīd’s view. However, it is his view of the authority of reason which is to some extent debatable. His statement as to “reason requires to give an ear to knowledge and its consequences” has given rise to some debates. Commentators have interpreted such statements of Shaykh al-Mufīd in different ways, which can be classified into two categories with the second one consisting of two approaches by itself. It is worth noting that both of them are inconsistent with a part of Shaykh al-Mufīd’s ideas. Based on a critical analysis of existing views, the author believes that theory and practice are separate from each other. In other words, it seems that, Shaykh al-Mufīd believes in the independent authority of reason in practice; however, he has different theoretical views, and one cannot find any idea regarding the authority of autonomous reason which has not been challenged. This paper discusses the problem of reason and a number of related issues such as the definition, function, authority of reason, and the relationship between reason and revelation. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  3 - A Study of Ḥakīm Khājūī’s Objections to the Gnostic Theory of Oneness of Being
  Mahmud  Seydi Mohammad Javad  Pashaei
  20.1001.1.15600874.1400.27.1.3.9
  As the basis of theoretical gnosis, oneness of being has provoked several debates among thinkers in the history of Islamic philosophy. Mullā Ismā‘īl Khājūī, one of the thinkers and Mutikallimun of the Safavid period and post-Sadrian era, has criticized this theory and c More

  As the basis of theoretical gnosis, oneness of being has provoked several debates among thinkers in the history of Islamic philosophy. Mullā Ismā‘īl Khājūī, one of the thinkers and Mutikallimun of the Safavid period and post-Sadrian era, has criticized this theory and challenged it from different aspects. Khājūī rejects this theory based on the ontological differences between the Necessary Being and possible beings, absence of absoluteness in the Necessary Being, the lack of a rational argument for demonstrating the oneness of being, and the inefficiency of the arguments of some gnostics and mystics on proving this oneness. However, the present study postulates that Khājūī’s criticisms originate in confusing the different meanings of certain key terms in philosophical sciences and kalām with those in theoretical gnosis. Nevertheless, it seems that in certain cases, such as gnostics’ failure in adducing a rational argument for demonstrating the oneness of being, his criticism is justified. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  4 - A Comparative Study of Muṭahharī’s Theory of Fiṭrah and Kant’s Practical Reason
  Omid Arjomand Ghasem Kakaie
  20.1001.1.15600874.1401.28.2.2.7
  Murtaḍā Muṭahharī, one of the prominent thinkers in the field of Islamic Philosophy, and Immanuel Kant, one of the great thinkers of Western philosophy, have presented some innovative theories in the realm of philosophy. The “theory of fiṭrah” is one of the most signifi More

  Murtaḍā Muṭahharī, one of the prominent thinkers in the field of Islamic Philosophy, and Immanuel Kant, one of the great thinkers of Western philosophy, have presented some innovative theories in the realm of philosophy. The “theory of fiṭrah” is one of the most significant theories in Muṭahharī’s philosophical system. He maintains that Man possesses three levels of nature, instinct, and fiṭrah (primordial nature) and also divides fiṭrah itself into two parts: “fiṭrah of knowledge” and “fiṭrah of interest”. Most of Muṭahharī’s innovative ideas, particularly when explaining some topics “such as God, eternity of the soul, and ethics, have been presented in his discussions related to fiṭrah of interest.” On the other hand, as a distinguished and influential philosopher, Kant has criticized metaphysical issues, particularly problems in connection to God, immortality of the soul, and freedom, and transferred them to the realm of “practical reason” from theoretical reason. Muṭahharī’s theory of fiṭrah and, particularly, the discussion of fiṭrī interests and the related issues, such as demonstration of God, immortality of the soul, and ethics, are completely comparable to Kant’s theory of practical reason, specifically the discussion of the essential principles of practical reason, including freedom, eternity of the soul, and God. The purpose of this study is to compare Muṭahharī’s theory of fiṭrah and Kant’s theory of practical reason and to explain their common features, that is, the similarity of infinite perfection with supreme good, the similarity of their methods of demonstrating the eternity and God, and the similarity of their views as to status of philosophy of ethics. The author has followed a descriptive-analytic and comparative approach in order to conduct this study based on the data collected from these two thinkers’ works. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  5 - Pentagonal Model of Knowledge Sources and their Comparative Order in Sadrian and Cartesian Structure of Knowledge
  Hassan  Rahbar Kazim Mosakhany Eshaq Asoodeh Hamid  Eskandari
  20.1001.1.15600874.1402.29.1.6.6
  Epistemology, which deals with the possibility, whatness, sources, and realm of knowledge, bases one of its most important principles on discovering Man’s sources of knowledge. Contemporary epistemologists refer to five sources of knowledge for human beings: sense perce More

  Epistemology, which deals with the possibility, whatness, sources, and realm of knowledge, bases one of its most important principles on discovering Man’s sources of knowledge. Contemporary epistemologists refer to five sources of knowledge for human beings: sense perception, reason, introspection, testimony, and memory. Descartes, as a philosopher of the Western world, and Mullā Ṣadrā, as a philosopher of the world of Islam, have provided some theories regarding the problem of knowledge, particularly its sources. Their views are compatible with the pentagonal model proposed by cotemporary epistemologist in this respect. Mullā Ṣadrā and Descartes believe that knowledge acquisition begins with sense perception and ends in reason. Nevertheless, the difference is that, although reason in the Transcendent Philosophy is the last level of perception, it does not mark the end of the way, and it is intuition-based introspection that ends the acquisition of true knowledge. In the cognitive schools of Mullā Ṣadrā and Descartes, sense perception, intellect, and introspection are responsible for producing knowledge, testifying to its transfer, and functioning as social and general sources of knowledge, and memory is responsible for maintaining and safekeeping of knowledge. Manuscript profile