فصلنامه مطالعات فرهنگ - ارتباطات
پیاپی 3 (پاییز 1387)

The issue of the meaning is one of the complicated issues of philosophy and linguistic. At this paper has been tried to point to some of the complexities of the meaning issue through a philosophic style and context. First, some questions are going to make by general thought about the meaning to represent some common aspects of this issue, not base on philosophic precisions. However, these questions are deep and thoughtful.Then, through mentioning that philosophers have considered meaning issue, the aspect of current philosopher about the meaning will be pointed. Two main current philosophies (i.e. analytic philosophy and phenomenology processes which can be said that other processes are breakaways of these two philosophy processes) regarding to the meaning issue are introduced, briefly. Final, it is attempted to state a list of primary questions about the meaning at the same thought field by focusing on analytic philosophy processes, and the parameters that can be accounted for understanding the specialties of this philosophic thought. We will see here that the discussion of the meaning is extensive and comprehensive and accessing to all of its subtleties is not simple.Therefore, for emphasizing on philosophic complexity and subtleties of this subject, there have been selected two issues and done some discussions around them. One is the relationship of the “meaning” and “cognition”, and the other is the relationship of “the meaning” and “language”. The first one is investigated in general at once, again on analytic philosophy based on one of the analysts named Cuine. Second issue is investigated in view points of Vingestine, Cuine and John Searl briefly, and because of the extension and depth of some of the views it has not been investigated in viewpoint of philosophers such as Davidson. As a result of these investigations we find out that even at a thought tradition like analytic philosophy, we are facing with how many technical and strict of investigations which makes difficult listing of the meaning issues.

For researching the meaning of “Ershad”, we can just open a Farsi- Arabic dictionary and find its meaning. If we want to do something more, we can find the meaning of this word in other Farsi -Arabic dictionaries. This is a simple and of course non-scholarly way and its result are not reliable for a studious pursuit. This pursuit is not confirmed by the sciences of linguistics and semantics, as well as, as we will see, it is not justifiable at the history-sociology processes that cause some changes in meanings and concepts.“Historical transition of Concepts” represents this important fact that the meaning and concepts of language will be evolved during history and it is not as we thought that a word had been used in the same meaning all the time. Epistemologically, “historical transition of concepts” has a rigid link with how we study this transition. Here we don’t propose to investigate the result of this speech that epistemology anticipates ontology or vise versa. Rather, the point is if we want to offer any evidence for this transition first should think about how to find such evidences and choose an approach for studying its transitions in history process. At this paper some arrangements about the way of studying historical transition of concepts have been accommodated to researchers and those who care.First we should know what is the meaning? What is concept? What is the link of the meaning with concept? What is the link of the meaning and concepts with referent? Then we should codify our searching pursuit steps for such research and find well approach for investigating historical transition of concepts.Principal issue, “the meaning of Islamic Ershad”, should be listed through studying historical transition of concepts by knowing generalities of how studying historical transition of concepts. According to mentioned issues at the end of this paper by asking some questions about the meaning of Islamic Ershad, we have tried to qualify primary issues for preceding the issue of the meaning of Islamic Ershad as lead to a well-rounded searching scheme.

For proceeding the issue of “The meaning of Islamic Ershad”, investigating various viewpoints about the meaning is demanded. At this paper it has been focused on “Dialectic” and “the Meaning” in the hope that this investigation will help us in achieving the meaning of Islamic Ershad. Before focusing on the link of “the meaning and dialectic” we should find out what do we mean by dialectic? If we refer to the history of thought and philosophy, we will meet different characters who exhausted to dialectic; of course there are some basic differences in their thought and philosophy.At articles especially philosophy ones, are evolved during history; and dialectic is not expectance. For instance, Plato’s idea about dialectic is different from Kant’s. At this paper we don’t propose to observe the meaning of dialectic. Therefore we try to point to common aspects of dialectic as well as various aspects of intelligentsia and philosophers’ viewpoints.

Current semantic processes can be divided into two periods, precedent and modern. At the precedent period that semantic proceedings, especially in Western Europe, are affected by Saussure’s viewpoints, the introduced ideologies have primarily completed his viewpoints. At central Europe, the erect proceeds from France, Denmark, Dutch speakers’ regions and Eastern Europe countries along with the motions that had taken place in Russia, has been considered. The proceeds of Dutch speakers’ regions and Eastern Europe countries are less known. As the important semantic proceeds of Dutch speakers’ regions and Russia are not known by those speaking in English and French languages. At this paper, semantic proceeds of precedent periods have been introduced in western and central Europe and finally, investigating Anglo-Saxon proceeds. This category and the way of discussion are considered for modern proceeds, too.

This paper has been organized according to the speech of Dr. Ahmad Pakatchi under the title of “Study of the Meaning in the Islamic Tradition”.Increasing development of new science in west and acquaintance of intelligentsia and scholars of our Islamic country with these accomplishments, have made this pre-assumption that any viewpoint in the Islamic-Iranian intellectual tradition can not be posed as a “progressive” viewpoint in various theoretical science, and technologies. Although today, this assumption is confirmed for some of cognitive branches, this imagination that in all cognitive branches we should just be a consumer of westerns’ achievements, requires investigation.“Semantic” is one of the sciences that may provoke above-mentioned assumption. At this assemblage, we acquainted with current western semantic ideologies and their achievements. Acquaintance with these accomplishments on the one hand, is very essential, on the other hand, may create this delusion that listing any issues about meaning should be offered through theoretical frame of current semantic accomplishments.Although considering those accomplishments is important for listing the issues of meaning, it is wrong to say that no intellectual activity or accomplishment would have been taken place among Islamic-Iranian intelligentsia and scholars and we have to refer to westerns, entirely. In technological area, somehow it might be confirmed; however in the area of theoretical science it is less acceptable. As one of the posed issues in listing current semantic is “the meaning of meaning” and it sounds quite “new”, this thought will be generated that with the prime issues that current western linguists, philosophers and logicians have offered, there would remain no place for relying on theoretical science in the Islamic tradition in which no basic transition have occurred for tens, or rather hundreds, years.

Although it can be claimed that religious prime concepts have real and stable meaning, always the meaning of the words suffers during the time and a word does not use in one meaning. Namely, it is the way of human’s conceptions that would determine the way of presence of such meaning at its life area.This article neither seek to investigate historical transition of the concept of Roshd and Ershad, nor claim to attain their real meaning in Islamic culture; rather just try to approach its concept to real and stable meaning of these concepts and at this regard suggest a semantic system and a theoretical classification and pose an educative theoretical viewpoint. In other word, aside the historical transition and modern usage of Islamic Ershad, this article propose to define the meaning of Islamic Ershad and tread to theoretical classification for determining the relation of this concept with other near concepts. This meaning probe is taken place in an educative attitude and along the theory of the author in the area of Islamic education (Vision theory); therefore it is not simply included validity and Quran searching.This article has been written with view to find a new perception of Islamic Ershad in the form of phenomenology and based on an interpretation of valid religious texts. Hope that this perception enters the planning area through changing sights.