جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « مثل افلاطونی » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Clarifying the nature of accidental lights is one of the main parts of Suhrawardi’s emanative structure. Having elaborated the way these lights illuminate and the role they play in creating Lords of Species (archetypes), he innovatively explained parallel (horizontal) multiplicities of intellects whose presences make all entities possible in all worlds lie below the world of Power (Alam al-Jabarut), i.e., alam al-malakut and alam al-mulk.Mulla-Sadra, who has often mentioned Platonic Ideas in his works and considered himself as a defender of this theory, was intensely influenced by Suhrawardi’s emanative structure and especially his theory of Lords of Species (archetypes), which are equivalent to Platonic Ideas. Although Mulla-Sadra mostly owes his ontological structure to Suhrawardi’s emanative one, he, when dealt with the problem of accidental lights, which provides a basis for Lords of the Species to be possible, presumes that believing in accidental lights is in conflict with the principle of complete actuality of intellects and their pure incorporeity. In this article, firstly, we make it clear why even if someone adheres to Mulla-Sadra's position regarding complete actuality of intellects, he can still accept Lords of the Species. He can explain the creation of parallel (horizontal) order of intellects by referring to different aspects of intellects lie in ascending (vertical) order. Secondly, we show that Mulla-Sadra was not justified in believing in complete actuality of intellects. Because it is not one of the principles of Transcendent Wisdom (Al-Hikma al-muta ‘aliya), nor does it cohere with other main principles of this philosophical system.

Undoubtedly, one of the important topics in the field of epistemology in Islamic philosophy is how to obtain general perceptions for humans. Since the basic element that differentiates human beings from other beings is intellect, the ability to understand rational things is a matter of course for every philosopher. But there is a difference of opinion among the sages in the way of obtaining intellectual perceptions. The root of this long-standing difference is the difference of opinion between Plato and Aristotle in the way of the existence of the universal. The purpose of writing this research is to examine the differences between these two bases and the philosophical fruits of these two theories in different philosophical topics. In this article, using a descriptive-analytical method, an attempt has been made to first clearly explain the opinion of those who believe in the theory of "ideal" and also those who believe in the theory of "abstraction" and then the philosophical fruits of believing in both theories in both fields of ontology. and epistemology to be shown. It should be noted that judging between these two opinions is beyond the responsibility of this article.

Muslim philosophers have been influenced by the views of ancient Greek philosophers in the issue of generality (generic) and partiality, so that the essence of the views presented in the Islamic era can be seen in the opinions of Plato and Aristotle. Avicenna, like Aristotle, has denied the theory of Forms (theory of Ideas) and rejected Plato’s view about the general and partial issue. Unlike Avicenna, Suhrawardī has accepted the Platonic theory of Forms, but he has denied the Platonic generality in the issue of generality (generic) and partiality and has had a common opinion in explaining of “generic” (Arabic: کلی) with Aristotle and Avicenna, which means that he, like Avicenna, considers generality to be the same of mental concept as independently subsistent. Of course, Shaikh al-ʿIshraq (Master of Illumination) has opposed Avicenna in some minor aspects of this issue and has presented innovations. This article has explained Suhrawardī’s point of view on the issue of generality (generic) and partiality by an analytical-descriptive method and studied the reason of his tendency to Peripatetic explanation of the “generic”. Suhrawardī’s critiques of Sinavi’s approach have also been explained in this analytical study, and their impact on Mullā Ṣadrā’s critique on Peripatetic’s theory has been shown. Also, Mullā Ṣadrā’s encounter with Suhrawardī’s view on the issue of generality (generic) has been analyzed.

This study compares and explains the explanation of revelation in minor matters and the role of the Prophet's imagination in this process from the perspective of Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra. The research findings indicate that the source of revelation knowledge is active intellect (= angel of revelation); The teachings of the active intellect are general, and both philosophers have given an important role to the imagination of the prophet in explaining the quality of receiving the revelatory partial teachings. The role of imagination from Ibn Sina's point of view is to imitate and formulate general revelatory truths in the realm of the prophet's imagination. From Sadr al-Mutallahin's point of view, however, the represented forms of revelatory truths are present in the Imaginal World (= like Plato), and the imagination of the prophet is united with these forms represented in the Imaginal World. Although in some of Sadra's works, imitations and imaginative formulations of revelatory facts have been discussed, but according to the evidence in his works, this explanation is a well-known theory that he has only reported. The present study has used the library method in collecting information and the descriptive-analytical method in inference.

The issue of the article is defend the claim that the experience of Beauty or Platonic love can be considered the numinous experience. First, the article explain Otto’s view on numinous experiences. Then it explain Plato’s view on Beauty and love. Finally, comparing the two views, the article will show that the experience of Beauty or Platonic love can be considered the numinous experience. Because, firstly, the experience of Beauty or Platonic love is an awareness of a “wholly other” being, which possesses all or at least the most prominent features of the numinous awareness. Secondly, Beauty as the object of this awareness also possess all or at least the most prominent features of the numen. Therefore, the experience of Beauty is the very experience of the numen.

Plato, the most influential of all thinkers of ancient Greece, has exerted an astonishingly powerful effect on Western civilization and culture. In particular, European Renaissance writers and poets are greatly indebted to his doctrine of love, as discussed in detail in his Symposium. John Milton, the last and one of the most illustrious figures of Renaissance òEurope and England, is no way out of Plato'€™s sphere of leaden influence: everywhere in his work there are echoes and traces of Plato. The present essay seeks first to briefly study the concept of Platonic love and then attempts to examine young Milton'€™s understanding of this doctrine and his practice of employing it in one of his early dramatic works, Comus, A Masque. Ultimately, the article can be best summarized by stating that Milton’s Mask play told what he had already learned about chastity and love and beauty from the Dialogues of Plato.

In search for the best justification of religious belief, first platonic knowledge is examined vis-à-vis empirical and rational knowledge. Then, it is illustrated how platonic teachings has been used to explain and justify religious belief. Finally, through the criticism of the use of platonic knowledge, it has been shown that Islamic mysticism or Irfan does not provide any justified knowledge and, therefore, cannot be used as the epistemological basis for religious belief.

The idea of Platonic archetypes, which was a solution for some problems related to knowledge of things, a justification for multitudes and a way of finding stable ultimate beginning for variable creatures, soon caused many problems in epistemology and knowledge of things. In Islamic world, the idea has famous proponents and opponents. Three great Muslim philosophers- Avicenna, Sohrevardi and Mulla Sadra- have discussed the issue in detail. Avicenna has firmly rejected the idea while Sohrevardi and Mulla Sadra have greatly tried to prove it. Since the theory of Platonic archetypes is strongly connected with the theory of emanation multitudes from a real One, the present paper seeks to elaborate on the dilemmas faced by the theory of emanation multitudes from a real One with regard to the idea of Platonic archetypes, and reviewing arguments of proponents and opponents.

There are several philosophical discussions in details on the division of different consideration of quiddity and how they can exist. According to the dominant point of view, physical universal has been regarded as a divided and its other considerations as its divisions. As for their existence, there is, however, a consensus about existence of corporeal individuals for the substantial quiddity, but there are different approaches to the existence of intellectual individuals which is interpreted as platonic and intellectual Ideas. It seems that as the mystics have regarded divided non conditioned existence as truth of being and considered its divisions as its theophany, it is feasible to say the same thing on the quiddity. By the following of the consequences of intellectual individual of substantial quiddity we can show that the other considerations of quiddity comparingto the intellectual individual, are its manifestations and derivations. Thenit cannot cause the real multiplicity in the individuals.

Visiting professor، University of Tehran، Farabi branch This paper seeks to study the history of Platonic ideas in the works of Islamic thinkers. The theory of Platonic ideas is of great ontological، epistemological، psychological، ethical، theological، and aesthetic significance. Since the time of Plato himself the issue of Platonic ideas has been subjected to an abundance of discussions، verifications and critiques، both by the western and the Islamic philosophers. A historical content analysis of the views of the Islamic thinkers including Farabi، Avicenna، Sheik Shahabeddin Suhrawardi، Mohaqeq Davani، Mirdamad، and Mulla Sadra، indicates that، firstly، the theory of Platonic ideas has both undergone numerous adjustments and modifications by the Muslim thinkers and has been adopted selectively and its ethical and aesthetic aspects have not been given any attention by them. Secondly، their reasons for the rejection or the substantiation of the theory of ideas are insufficient and، thirdly، the illuminist and mystic philosophers (in the general sense of the words) have shown more interest to accept it.

Considering the relation between the worlds of existence and the nature of that relation is one of the necessities of a systematic philosophy. Plato’s theory of ideals focuses just on finding the intellectual “individual” for different physical species. Apart from the challenge of gradation in quiddity, the theory is unable to determine the ideal individuals or the divine individual for physical species. With the florescence of the Islamic philosophy in transcendental philosophy and the development of the theory of essentiality and gradation of existence, however, a more precise explanation called the theory of collective existence has been offered that brings about the correspondence and conformity of all the worlds.

Suhravardi and Mullā Sadrā who have proved the theory of Ideas or Forms by following Plato have asserted that the Platonic Ideas or Forms are the cause of matter and the indivuals of each material kind. As regards the fact that the Imaginal World (objective realities independent and disconnected from man) is the intermediate between two other worlds (linear Intellects and Matter)، is it the cause of matter and it''s indiviulas? The authors in this essay have tried to answer this important question. It has been proved regarding the similarity between cause and effect (ontological homogeneity) and Mullā Sadrā’s view on empirical and imaginative knowledge that the Imaginal World (not the Intellectuall Ideas) is the cause of Matter. So the Ideas and Forms in the Imaginal World are the cause of matter and they are the effects of the intellectullal Ideas.

Platonic theory of ideas has caused detailed discussion between its supporters and opponents in both ontological and epistemological fields. Three great Muslim philosophers Avicenna, Shaykhe Ishraq and Molla Sadra not only think on the field but also Shaykhe Ishraq and Molla Sadra`s view stands against that of Avicenna. Sadra, viewing himself as the one most focusing on the matter and regarding it as a Divine favor to himself, has tried to complete the view of Sohrawardi with presenting the three proofs. The paper, reporting and criticizing Shaykhe Ishraq and Molla Sadra`s proofs, has shown that the two philosopher`s have failed to explain the part of ideas in the system of existence

Aristotle, in all his works including Metaphysics, Physics and Generation and Corruption, wherever expressing a view on an issue, makes references to Plato and other philosophers who preceded him trying to present flaws in their thoughts. To begin with critique is Aristotle’s specific philosophic method. Especially in Metaphysics, which, in his words, is the knowledge of ‘being in itself’ dealing with the what and why in all beings, he had to first consider and criticize the well-known views of his time among them the most vexatious one was that of Plato. Aristotle’s fight with Plato’s ‘theory of ideas’ started from the time he was a student of academy. His brief thesis ‘on ideas’, peri ideon, belongs to that era. The present article classifies Aristotle’s objections to Plato’s ideas trying to show their essence and intensity. To this end, the author’s have adopted a neutral stance toward the issues in their analysis and classification of the objections.

Mulla Sadra’s point of view concerning the perception of other is feasible as a result of profound study and serious critic of Ibn Sina’s ideas and its precise understanding demands more attention to these critiques. Ibn Sina considers the perception of other as acquired and based on impression. Mulla Sadra criticizes this theory and rejects it; because he regards it as based on principles such as permanence of corporeal and sensual substance, denial of Platonic ideas and negation of identity of the knower and the known which is by no means acceptable for him.Unlike Ibn Sina, Sadra bases his own commentary of the perception of other on the belief in the sustantial movement of body and soul, Platonic Ideas and unity of the subject and object and hence regards the perception of other restricted to intuitive percepion, i.e. the presence of the form of object before the subject. Truth and falsity or superiority of each of these two viewpoints about perception of the other depends on the truth and falsity or superiority of the fundamentals and principles of it. Of these four foundations, the identity of the knower and the known is of the utmost importance. This is a theory which the unity of bieng and principality of being constitutes its basis and not only distinguishes Mulla Sadra’s thought from Ibn Sina, but also from Suhravardi’s thought.

The present paper investigates Miriam Galston's interpretation of Farabi's political philosophy. Having made a contrastive study of Farabi's four main works (Madina Fazelah [Utopia], Siyasat Madaniyyah [Civil Politics], Tahsil al-Saadah [Realization of Happiness], and Fusool Montazaah [Abstracted chapters]), Galston tries to come up with a new conception of Farabi's political philosophy. The attention given to Aristotelian principles by Farabi's political philosophy is an interesting feature which characterizes Galston's interpretation. However, the in attention to the difference between Aristotelian philosophy and Platonic philosophy and the fact that Farabi's political philosophy is influenced by Islamic doctrines has not only led to Galston's failure to prove his claim but also to finally affirm the famous approach adopted by the interpreters of Islamic political philosophy who hold that Farabi's political philosophy is influenced by Platonic philosophy. The present paper elaborates on this point, using an analytical-documentary approach.