فصلنامه تاریخ فلسفه
سال هشتم شماره 3 (پیاپی 31، زمستان 1396)

Could the history of philosophy be viewed in the light of models? The author of this paper believes that a deliberation over the history of philosophy can reveal the traces of certain models for philosophizing. A model for philosophizing in its general sense indicates an allegorical mould based on which and within the framework of which a philosopher formulates his philosophy and his method of philosophizing. Accordingly, one can provide a general classification for all models of history of philosophy and then explain each of them. Based on the trend of the development of history of philosophy and the activities of philosophers, the models of philosophizing can be divided into three neutral, positivist, and negativist groups in general. The mirror (reflective) and narrative (iterative) models can be placed in the neutral category. However, the positivist models themselves can be divided into two mechanical and organic groups. The encyclopedic models fall under the first group, while the mathematical-tree (Descartes) models, mathematical-geometrical (Spinoza), puzzle-like models (Hume), architectural models (Kant), dialectic architectural models (Hegel), universalist organic architectural models (Schopenhauer), phenomenological architectural models (Heidegger in Being and Time) and logical architectural models (early Wittgenstein) belong to the second group. The therapeutic model (late Wittgenstein) and post-modern philosophies can be categorized under negativist models.

Early philosophers are of particular importance in the history of philosophy. This is because they led the first stages of the development of philosophical concepts and thoughts. Among them, three Milesian philosophers enjoy great significance. The question that they posed prompted later philosophers to try hard to provide a worthy response for it. They posed the question of: “What is the origin of the world?” During the period of the translation of philosophical texts into Arabic, Muslim philosophers became familiar with these three thinkers to some extent and quoted and, in some cases, interpreted their ideas. The present paper is intended to introduce Muslim philosophers’ interpretation of the views of Milesian pre-Socratic philosophers and demonstrate how justified they were in their interpretation. A short response to this question is that Muslim philosophers provided a completely non-historical interpretation, which is open to historical criticism.

As generally acknowledged, the term “hyle” in Peripatetic philosophy has been derived from Aristotle’s views on matter and form or potency and act. Although this term has been defined as “matter lacking actuality and enjoying pure potency” in Islamic philosophy, a study of the works of Muslim thinkers reveals that, because of the integration of some philosophical views with gnostic ideas as well as the influence of Islamic teachings, this term has undergone different semantic changes. As a result, in some schools of philosophy, it has been consciously employed to refer to actual affairs. Below, the writers have provided eight meanings for “hyle”, which are listed in their chronological order of formulation:1. Matter lacking any kind of actuality and enjoying pure potency, as accepted by Peripatetic philosophers and equivalent to its Aristotelian concept.
2. The fourth level of being, for the Isma‘ilite, which is posterior to the soul and prior to nature.
3. Pure substantial continuity, in some of Suhrawardi’s works, which, along with accidental quantity, constitutes the truth of body.
4. Matter inclusive of all possible worlds and an otherworldly expression of simple existence in the view of some gnostics.
5. One of the modes of form in line with Mulla Sadra’s view of the unitary integration of matter and form.
6. An equivalent to possible existence or created thing’s divine aspect (Face of God) in the view of Shaykh Ihsa’ei.
7. An expansion of the Aristotelian concept of prime hyle under the title of the dark nature of essence in Tafkik (separation) School.
8. An application of the matter of world to the element of water based on the religious texts of Tafkik School of thought.

One of the significant and influential aspects of the philosophy of technology is the historical background of the concepts related to this field in the words of the writers and thinkers of ancient Greece. Among such concepts, the concept of techne, in the sense of technique, industry, or art, and its place in ancient Greek works is of greater importance. Martin Heidegger was one of the first thinkers who conceived of the study of the concept of techne in ancient Greece as the introduction of a distinct perception of modern technology and held a particular view in this regard. Through the study of three groups of Greek texts, the present paper initially aims to trace the main elements of the concept of techne in the view of ancient Greek writers and thinkers. Second, through investigating Heidegger’s view, it intends to reintroduce the core of his analysis of this problem. Finally, it demonstrates that, firstly, techne is a rich concept, which, given its various elements, was so attractive to Greek thinkers that they used it in their philosophical discussions; secondly, its main elements have been repeated during ancient periods. However, in some periods, due to the existing conditions and views of different thinkers, some of its elements have become more foregrounded. The writers also conclude that reducing the complicated and multi-dimensional concept of techne into a general element does not appear to be correct and accurate.

Heraclitus was one of the important pre-Socratic philosophers who had some scattered notes on ethics. In order to understand his ethical views, in addition to referring to his existing notes, it is necessary to pay attention to the context in which his philosophy was formed. Heraclitus was under the influence of two traditions of his time. The first was the influence of Homer and early poets and philosophers, such as Solon, Bias of Priene, and the like, who were distinctively characterized by believing in human-like Gods or anthropomorphism. The other was the influence of a new scientific and technical tradition which was developed during the same century in Miletus under the influence of some figures such as Thales and Anaximander, who were mainly concerned with cosmology, that is, an understanding of the quality of the creation, survival and, finally, annihilation of the world order. In fact, Heraclitus’s philosophy can be viewed as a bridge between these two different traditions. Since he considered the world order and human order to be the same, it can be said that his main purpose and concern was explaining the status of human beings in the physical world and not the physical world itself. The ethics of Heraclitus, similar to those of other ancient Greek philosophers, described a kind of ethics of virtue, the core of which comprised virtue and happiness. In the field of virtue, he dealt with both moral virtues and intellectual virtues. Regarding moral virtues, through distinguishing bodily joys from non-bodily joys, he ultimately rejected excessive acts and introduced moderation in joys as the criterion for human behavior. With respect to intellectual virtues, Heraclitus also relied on the knowledge of wisdom and acknowledged that wisdom does not simply mean to have vast knowledge; rather, it means a kind of conscious and well-scrutinized knowledge which conforms to logos. As a result, he mainly emphasized intellectual rather than ethical virtues. Finally, he viewed man’s happiness a result of knowing and behaving in line with logos.

One of the important problems in the field of the study of Ibn Sina is whether his philosophy is of a Peripatetic nature or an Illuminationist one. Some believe that his philosophy follows an Illuminationist approach and offer certain proofs in order to demonstrate their claim. In a general classification, it can be said that some of these proofs are based on the works of Ibn Sina himself, and some others are based on the knowledge sources he benefitted from. The writers of this paper believe that the proofs adduced on the Illuminationist nature of Ibn Sina’s philosophy are open to criticism. Therefore, they initially delve into the nature of Illuminationist philosophy and provide a concise but precise account of the proofs and reasons presented in support of the above claim. Next, they analyze and criticize them and highlight their weaknesses. This research has been carried out following an analytic critical method.

Afnan and Sami al-Nishar believe that Islamic philosophers found access to the main texts of Stoic thinkers during the translation movement. Nevertheless, Josef van Ess maintains that Muslim philosophers were exposed to Stoic teachings in the course of the cultural interactions between Muslims and the residents of newly conquered regions. In the present paper, after criticizing these two ideas, the writer agrees with Dimitri Gutas’s view regarding the indirect impact of Stoic logical doctrines through the works of such logicians as Galen and Alexander of Aphrodisias. Then, by examining the concepts and technical terms which are employed by Stoic logicians in the analysis of conditional propositions and reasonings, he investigates the effects of such concepts and terms through the works of the above-mentioned logicians in the development of certain concepts such as conflict, necessity, and exception.