maryam barooti; Mohammad saeedimehr
Volume 11, Issue 1 , June 2022, , Pages 79-99
Abstract
The so-called principle of the simple (Qaideh al-wahid) can be considered as one of the most significant and challenging philosophical principles in the context of the Islamic philosophy. In his Remarks and Admonitios, Ibn Sina has discussed this principle under the title “admonition”. For ...
Read More
The so-called principle of the simple (Qaideh al-wahid) can be considered as one of the most significant and challenging philosophical principles in the context of the Islamic philosophy. In his Remarks and Admonitios, Ibn Sina has discussed this principle under the title “admonition”. For his commentator Khwaja Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, this means that Ibn Sina considers this principle as self-evident. Based on this, with a correct and precise concept of the components of the rule, we should accept it without any requirements to argumentation. In this article, we analyze each of the components of the principle by the method of conceptual analysis and then we examine the consistency between these components. The conclusion is that some of these components are inconsistent with the others and therefore there is no reasonable ground for admitting that the principle is self-evident.
Fatemeh Rafati; Mohammad saeedimehr; Babak Abbasi
Volume 9, Issue 2 , January 2020, , Pages 19-32
Abstract
Plato didn’t furnish a detailed and clear theory about evil. What one can find in some of his dialogues is just certain hints to issues like the source of evil. The obscurity of Plato’s works led to a vast controversy over his real views on the source of evil to the extent that some scholars ...
Read More
Plato didn’t furnish a detailed and clear theory about evil. What one can find in some of his dialogues is just certain hints to issues like the source of evil. The obscurity of Plato’s works led to a vast controversy over his real views on the source of evil to the extent that some scholars maintain that he didn’t develop any theory in this respect. Those who think that Plato has a theory don’t agree over what Plato takes as the source of evil. In this paper, with regard to the current distinction between metaphysical, natural, and moral evils, we argue that Plato believes in a distinct source for each one of these three kinds. Metaphysical evil which only occurs in the natural world has a negative nature and stems from the fact that the natural beings as the reflections of the world of ideas lack the full perfection of the ideas. Moral evils are caused by the activity of the soul and, finally, natural evils are the effects of necessity or matter. Accordingly, we conclude that in the light of the foregoing analysis the apparently inconsistent expressions of Plato would turn out to be consistent.
marzieh rezaie; Hamidreza Ayatollahy; Mohammad saeedimehr
Volume 7, Issue 1 , January 2018, , Pages 91-109
Abstract
One of the important issues in the philosophy of religion is the issue of the unity of the world and its relation to the unity of God. These different perceptions of the unity of the universe have been challenged by the unity of existence.In this paper, we are going to elucidate the viewpoints of the ...
Read More
One of the important issues in the philosophy of religion is the issue of the unity of the world and its relation to the unity of God. These different perceptions of the unity of the universe have been challenged by the unity of existence.In this paper, we are going to elucidate the viewpoints of the Muslim philosophers of the Transcendent Philosophy School with this discussion and evaluate their arguments and show the superiority of some of the views of others. In this regard, the viewpoints of Sadr's wisdom commentators who have contradictory opinions have been selected and their analysis has been analyzed.. Allameh Tabatabai, who is sometimes inclined to some form of unity, sometimes personal, sometimes also interprets the two-word consistency. Ultimately, he accepts the solid arguments of personal unity, but he does not have the ability to answer doubts. Motahari, who opposes the unity of existence, negation, negation, and neglect of possible possibilities, ultimately, by Allameh Javadi Amoli, with the proof of the "Absolute Absolute" and placing "being" and "appearing" against "lack of" defects that prevent the application of philosophy based on unity Were eliminated, so the way to change many topics was opened. In this paper, we intend to have a critical comparison of the views of these three thinkers.
morteza pouyan; Mohammad saeedimehr; Reza Akbarian; mohammad ali hojjati
Volume 3, Issue 2 , April 2015, , Pages 25-35
Abstract
Meanwhile Agha Ali Hakim was writing his interpretation on Asfar, wrote a thesis in which he presented a reading of ontological argument which he called creative and unique in the world of Islam and among Hekmat-E- Motealie’ s followers. He presented the reading through four considerations from ...
Read More
Meanwhile Agha Ali Hakim was writing his interpretation on Asfar, wrote a thesis in which he presented a reading of ontological argument which he called creative and unique in the world of Islam and among Hekmat-E- Motealie’ s followers. He presented the reading through four considerations from reality of being; if the reality of being, he says, considered 1. by itself; 2. conditioned by absoluteness; 3. conditioned by no condition; 4. purity of a being, we can prove God: because when reality of being be considered by each of these four consideration, we cannot suppose a principle for it; since it leads to circular argument or infinite chain argumentation, and an existent that has no principle, is God only. While we review his reading of the ontological argument, will deal with this problem that by which one of those considerations his argument is complete and by which one is incomplete.
