فصلنامه حکمت و فلسفه
سال سیزدهم شماره 4 (پیاپی 52، زمستان 1396)

The current study attempts to evaluate the claim that Mirdamad and his disciples, such as Mulla Sadra and Mir Seid Ahmad Alavi, considered Suhrawardi a Successors of the Stoics. Since the Stoics have been quoted in a small number of publications in Islamic works, by searching in these sources, all the narrations cited and related to the Stoics are compared with Suhrawardi's views, and about forty similar cases have been considered among their opinions. The results suggest: A) Direct effects: objects as quantity, the different definition of the substance and the accident, form as accident, denial of the prime matter, denial of real condensation and rarefaction, spherical revolutions,and etc.
B) Indirect effects: the reduction of the ten categories, the hierarchy of existence, the immateriality of the soul, and etc.
It is also examined that on the basis of what evidence Mirdamad and his disciples called Suhrawardi "successors of stoic". Previously, John Wallbridge (2000) attempted to answer the question of why Mulla Sadra regarded Suhrawardi as a "successors of the Stoic". But, his answer has been criticized, and it is hypothesized in the current study that due to link between the "al-aqdamin" (the ancients) in Suhrawardi's works and the stoic's views, Mirdamad Sheikh has called him as an "successors of the stoic".

The present article attempts to answer a crucial question: why does Plato attach such importance to “language”? In many dialogues, such as Theaetetus and Sophist he surveys this subject; and in Cratylus language plays a pivotal role. Moreover the article deals with the inseparable connection between metaphysics and language in Plato’s philosophy. The main claim is that this connection is so firm and deep that Plato’s view on language can be seen as dependent on his view on the real entities, namely Forms. Plato criticizes the prevailing theories of his time like “conventionalism” and “naturalism” on the same ground. In other words, while analyzing these two clashing views, Plato shows that the nature of things cannot be discovered through studying their names.

This paper is an attempt to study Spinoza's epistemology and its educational supplies with a critical approach based on Islamic teachings. To achieve the objectives of this research, conceptual, descriptive, analytical and critical methods have been applied. The results revealed that issue of recognition plays an important part in his philosophical system. Spinoza divided knowledge into four categories including: knowledge from the senses, experiences, inference and intuitive. Based on his epistemology, the most important educational supplies consist of indoctrination in education, the manifestation of the rational nature in education, the attainment of unity and high stages in the education, the efforts and perseverance of educators, the emphasis on the role of nature in education, paying attention to religious institutions in moral education and avoiding conflicts in learning process. Despite the positive points that exist in the epistemological and educational theories of Spinoza including the activation of educators and the emphasis on rationality, there are also challenges that can be criticized based on Islamic teachings. These include humanistic epistemology of Spinoza's theory, cognitive relativism in Spinoza's theory, and Spinoza’s emphasis on indoctrination in education, ignoring individual differences in education, and lacking of attention to critical thinking in education.

Mulla Sadra believes that there is no difference between writing and speech in their essence. By separation of God speech from human speech, we come to this conclusion that based on Mulla Sadra’s philosophy of language and his explanation of language process; human writing is prior over his speech. If achieving of Truth is our criterion, there would be two difficulties in regard to human speech and writing: human mistakes in achieving truth; changing concepts into the agreed words in the process of language. Considering that human speech is prior over his writing, causes the listener, for understanding meaning of the speech, to be confined to the time and situation of the speech; whereas, reading the text causes the reader to analyze all possible meanings of the text. Based on Mulla Sadra’s view, there are two principles in the process of language: rationality before speaking/writing, and analyzing any speech or text.

Despite this fact that epistemology has not been regarded as a science and branch in Islamic philosophy, Islamic philosophers spoke about the ontological debates on the topic of so-called modern-epistemology. Although the approach of rationalism and experientialism has several criteria, it is undeniable that this discussion and division are among the new topics of epistemology and such terms, with the approach in epistemology, have not been popular in the thinking of Islamic philosophers. Nevertheless, it is possible to think about their way of thinking: experimentation or rationalism. The fact that is well-known is that they are rational philosophers, and Ibn-e Sina does the same. In current study, four criteria for rationality or experimentation are expressed: 1. the existence and the lack of intrinsic perceptions, 2. the means of acquiring knowledge, 3. the origin of attestation, and 4. the existence and absence of a priori certifications. Then, by referring to Ibn-e-Sina's statements, the rationale or experimental nature of the epistemic instrument examined him according to each criterion which leads to strengthening the hypothesis that, not in general, but in most of its criteria, it is more inclined to experientialism than rationalism Therefore, it is possible to sum up these two views, namely, the "authenticity of reason and experience" in Ibn-e Sina's thinking.

Pathos is one of those concepts that mostly underestimated its importance versus other Aristotelian concepts. It can be observed that pathos frequently explained in twofold relations and in that sense pathos's importance neglected vis-a-vis other twofold concept. One of the most important of those twofold relations is Logos - Pathos that exiles Pathos to the illogical territory and curb its implications to the feelings and passivity. In contemporary research we see that researchers stressed on Pathos as a fundamental concept to Aristotle's reading. The reason for recent stressing is that researchers read pathos in relation to Kinesis (change, motion). This new vision on Pathos takes it necessary to any kind of change and motion. For that reason, Pathos is not definite by illogical and sensitive territory. This article tries to deconstruct the twofold relation between Logos - Pathos and on the other hand to recognition Poetics intentionality with taking advantage of Pathos's concept.