نشریه پژوهشهای معرفت شناختی
سال هفتم شماره 2 (پیاپی 16، پاییز و زمستان 1397)

Imagination has lied in the horizon beyond the reason, continuous imagination as an important epistemological instrument can achieve some facts which is not available for the reason. However, the discontinuous imagination has embraced the all creatures. It is the complete corresponding to the being except the God, without imagination the God and His words cannot be understood precisely and the universe in its totality as well. Imagination is identified with the heart which can obtain the intuitions and direct knowledge. Reason has its own static and fixed principles which can achieve the God’s incomparable aspects. But the imagination is constantly in transforming as same as the universe. Imaginary knowledge opens up and in constant motion as well as the life and cosmos which does not lead to a final point of view and Idea. Ibn Al Arabi’s Imagination has been neglected by the philosophers and then they have been prevented from many facts epistemologically and ontologically. This research has tried to evaluate the importance of the imagination in epistemology and ontology by the analytical methods.

The discussion about Method in Logic is very important, because it makes clear content, aim and nature of logic. Logic like other sciences based on method and it must be determined which method is used in logic. For example in Aristotelian logic the method is deductive one, that is, rational deduction from premises of categorical and conditional propositions. Bacon's empirical logic is based on experiment and induction. In Kant transcendental logic, the conception of method differs entirely from deduction and empirical method. In Kant’s view, method means determination of a priori conditions of knowledge. Hegel has different concept comparing to Kant. In Hegel’s approach, method is dynamic process in which we can determine organic structure and generation of categories. Accordingly, the method is regarded as comprehensive system that finally all multiplicity of categories will be unified, in other words, method is form containing all contents of logic.

Since Allameh Tabatabai designed firstly the theory of derivation purposing to protect the rational identity of a part of human knowledge confirming that human knowledge is not at all the result of his livelihood. Therefore this theory quickly showed its impact on the realm of moral philosophy. Recently, there are some attempts to establish philosophy of culture on the basis of this theory. This article addresses the theory of abstraction and its application in the political philosophy and global peace. Finally, it suggests that the theory provides an important basis to establish a kind of political philosophy and global peace by regarding ethics, religion, culture and language as derivative affairs. It will be able to reduce the strength and intensity of conflict on ethnic and cultural affairs and facilitate peace and stability and ethnic coexistence. All of these cannot be achieved except by a profound consideration of the epistemological nature of religion, culture and morality.

Wittgenstein frankly is speaking on certainty as a basic term which precedes skepticism believing that doubt game is possible in certainty ground, and we have no ground except certainty, extremist skepticism is self contradiction. Wittgenstein claims that Descartes' “Dreaming Argument” is the deepest and most powerful form of skepticism; in the first Meditation, Descartes is able to infect himself, as it were, with a profound skeptical difficulty about perceptual knowledge: what he calls "the principal reason for doubt, namely my inability to distinguish between being asleep and being awake". From past to the present, the attempts to neutralize such threats have been largely regarded as unsuccessful. But the writings of Wittgenstein mark a new development in defusing this deflationary posture. Unlike most philosophers who have assumed that Skepticism represents a coherent position that demands a responsible rebuttal, Wittgenstein emphasized that it was senseless, and required no formal refutation. In this paper we seek to demonstrate that Descartes' purpose has never been to remain uncertain; he always tries to overcome doubt and he wants to come to a certainty; In the case of “Dreaming Argument” ultimately in the sixth Meditation Descartes is prepared to solve and dismiss this very same difficulty in a mere paragraph; here we told that "the exaggerated doubts of the last few days should be dismissed as laughable". He writes that there is a vast difference between being asleep and being awake.

Epistemology is one of the most important issues in philosophy. Since the principle issue of Transcendent Wisdom is the principality of existence, response to this question depends on the principality of existence. According to the principality of existence, existence is real and principal in the external world and quiddity is derivative. According to Mulla Sadra’s opinion the reality of existence does not come in mind, so the conformity of subject to object in his philosophy refers to the issue of quiddity and existence. We can elicit two meanings of principality from Mulla Sadra’s opinion that each of them leads to different conclusions and conformity of subject to object is different from each other in both meanings. According to Kant subject does not correspond to object, because what is in our mind which is known to us, is only the Phenomenon and manifestation of objects and our mind cannot know the reality of objects. In this way, corresponding of subject with object in Kant’s philosophy refers to Noumenon and Phenomenon. To investigate these two approaches, we decided to compare existence in its different meanings with Noumenon and also quiddity in its meanings with Phenomenon. Being in some aspects is similar to psychological meaning of noumenon, but the being is more general than noumenon.

The paper deals with a particular group of objections against representational theories about phenomenal experiences. The author, primarily, illustrates the importance of representational theories and clarifies some helpful categories of representational versions which has used in the paper. Then, it focuses on an especial group of objections against the inclusion of these theories. This group of objections undermines the inclusion of representationalism about "bodily sensations" and "intentional states". Opponents, in fact, make some doubts that representational approach cannot explain the phenomenal character of bodily sensations and intentional states. The paper has described these two difficulties, the first one has been discussed among scholars and the later represented by the author. It, finally, peruses the actual and potential responses of representationalists and, then, concludes that representational theories can come over the objections about bodily sensations, but they should give some explaination in order to unravel the objections about intentional states.

Sadr, who believed that while visioning, the human soul creates sensible forms, disagreed and criticized Suhrawardi's theory according to which, while visioning, the human soul gains illuminative knowledge in presence during the vision. Sabzawari defended Suhrawardi's theory and in addition to answering Sadr's criticism, tried to harmonize Suhrawardi's theory with the foundations of transcendent philosophy. The article is reporting, reviewing, and investigating to harmonize these two points of view as a new approach. The result is that two explanations can be understood from his words. These explanations suffer from some defects including incompatibility with illuminative philosophy, but the theory which is obtained from his second explanation is adjusted to the transcendent philosophy and can be regarded as a new theory in the history of development of theories on the quality of vision.