محمد علی عبداللهی

The analysis of the relationship between reason and morality is as old as the history of thought, and philosophers from ancient Greece have always had a serious concern for evaluating this relationship. Taha Abd al-Rahman, an important Moroccan philosopher who is considered among the important thinkers of the Islamic world, is also trying to do something new by examining the concept of reason and morality and measuring the relationship between the two. In his thought, modern rationality is an element that is opposed to morality. To understand the nature of reason, he mentions three types of reason, whose analysis is necessary to understand the relationship between reason and morality. These three types of intellect are Abdur Rahman's innovative division, which can be considered as the basis of his moral system. In his opinion, the difference between humans and animals is morality, not reason . A rationality that is based on morality and constantly considers ethics as a supervisor and ruler has value, not that rationality that is alien to morality. In this article, after analyzing the two concepts of reason and morality in Abdul Rahman's thought, we will evaluate his approach regarding the relationship between reason and morality.

Today, although the debates related to knowledge have expanded, the question of the possibility of knowledge and certainty is still the starting point of epistemological debates. Wittgenstein and Moore are two influential philosophers of the 20th century who stand in an important position against each other. Moore is the only philosopher that Wittgenstein mentions in the book On Certainty and it was Moores view on knowledge that is the basis of the Austrian philosopher for further discussions about knowledge and certainty. In response to the problem of the possibility of knowledge and the problem of skepticism, Moore claims that there are facts that we know and have knowledge of. He lists a list of propositions whose knowledge is certain. Wittgensteins approach to this claim has a negative and a positive side. According to Wittgenstein, Moores propositions such as here is a hand are not correct examples of knowledge or knowing Moore does not use them correctly. There is a difference between knowledge and certainty. Knowledge and certainty belong to different categories. On the other hand, Wittgenstein is with Moore in attributing a different role to the mentioned propositions in the epistemic system. Wittgensteins criticism of Moore does not weaken the epistemological status of Moores propositions, but gives a more fundamental basis to such propositions.

Religion and technology are pervasive phenomena of human life and their interaction has taken various forms. The purpose of this research is to formulate types of synergy between religion and technology (superficial, incorrect and incomplete). Also, a favorable and responsible approach to this relationship is presented from the perspective of a technological person and a religious person. The purpose of religion is to educate a person; The highest goal of religious education is to reach closeness as a formative reality; So, in this research, the effect of synergy between religion and technology is explained and analyzed to clarify its effect in reaching this goal. The research method is descriptive-analytical. The findings show that although religion and technology can benefit from each other in multiple ways, sharing in the search for excellence has caused new aspects of their synergy. In this research, the type of religious man's encounter with technology and the technological man's encounter with religion are drawn. The focal position of the concept of closeness in Islamic education is paid attention to highlight the superstructure and underlying reflections on the relationship between religion and technology for the guardians of education who are interested in both religious growth and the intelligentization of educational centers and content. The results of the research show that the face of technology itself and its aspects that serve the basic needs of mankind, consciously or unconsciously lead to closeness; But when technology is used for selfish human policies and procedures, it is destructive and undesirable.

Since society is among the contingent entities, its existence is dependent on Necessary Existence. God, as the agent and creator of the contingent world, grants the existence of society through human wills and actions, in such a way that the existence of society cannot be reconciled with its non-existence. The divine traditions that we can know through the revealed and rational structures are the basis of our existence and all other realities. Just as realism is the precondition of our existence and all scientific and rational theories, divine traditions also -with the same extent and with the same breadth- provide the basis for our individual and social lives. Accordingly, society is a collection of divine traditions and its emergence requires collective action. Divine traditions, as the constitutive principles, play a causal role in the existence and survival of society. This paper, using a descriptive-analytical method, also deals with some consequences of this understanding of society, the most important of which are: the centrality of human primordial nature in perceiving divine traditions and formation of society, reverse predication in predicating tradition upon society, the necessity of immateriality of society, rejecting relativism, and preserving human volition and responsibility.

Since the time of Aristotle, some philosophers have insisted on the point that a part of knowledge is more fundamental than other parts. There have been various forms of foundationalism in epistemology, ethics and logic, and each of them has considered a certain matter as the basis according to the field under discussion. Avrum Stroll believes that Wittgenstein is a fundamentalist, but his fundamentalism is completely different from the approach of traditional fundamentalists, and Wittgenstein's intelligent distinction between knowledge and its foundations keeps his fundamentalism away from the problems that traditional fundamentalists have. Stroll enumerates nine conditions for fundamentalism and believes that these nine conditions exist in Wittgenstein's epistemological system. He believes that Wittgenstein gives two different understandings of the basis of certain beliefs, one is relative (propositional) fundamentalism and the other is absolute (non-propositional) fundamentalism, and over time Wittgenstein moves away from relative fundamentalism and leans towards absolute fundamentalism. In this article, after clarifying Stroll's argument about Wittgenstein's fundamentalism and the difference between this fundamentalism and its traditional interpretations, we examine Stroll's distinction between Wittgenstein's two conceptions of fundamentalism and show what characteristics each of these two conceptions has and how Wittgenstein prefers the absolute fundamentalism and expands it.

The central paradigm is a theoretical framework for research in natural and human sciences. In this methodological approach, the place of epistemology and to some extent ontology in the research process is discussed, but anthropology is not independently considered by methodologists. The purpose of this research is to introduce and evaluate the paradigm-oriented approach in research methodology and outline the position of anthropology in methodology. The research method is descriptive-analytical. The findings indicate that since the research methodology is based on epistemology, and according to Allameh Javadi Amoli's opinion, epistemology is related to anthropology, it is necessary to independently consider humans in the methodology. Science should be paid. Anthropological attention puts important capacities in front of scientific knowledge, and the attitude about the nature of science, the method of knowledge and construction of theory is brought more clearly.

Defenders of the error theory believe that no moral knowledge can be found. They consider morality to be just a pleasant legend inherited from our ancestors. Russ Shafer-Landau a famous contemporary moral philosopher, believes that what the defenders of the error theory pursue is not only an attack on a specific moral point of view, but they seek to make the entire moral theory ineffective. According to Russ Shafer-Landau , the followers of the error theory to defend their claim must show that firstly, the acceptance of ethics depends on commitment to moral objectivity and the absoluteness of moral reasons, and secondly, even in the assumption that ethics is based on these two presuppositions, Less than one of these two assumptions is false.  In this article, by examining the strongest arguments against moral objectivity from Russ Shafer-Landau's point of view and revealing their ineffectiveness, we show that the arguments of the defenders of the error theory against objective morality are, at best and strongest, sterile, and therefore skepticism and the impossibility of knowledge Morality is not a correct view of morality.

For Spinoza mind and body are the same substance. Thus, mind and body are ontologically the same thing, the same reality or substance. The mind is inseparable from the body, and vice versaThis unity of mind and body as one substance is in contrast to Descartes' belief that mind and body are separate substances.Spinoza believed the mind and body are different conceptually but not ontologically.Spinoza not only believed this ontological division of mind from body or nature was incorrect, but he also viewed this separation as unhealthy and unethical. He believed that a knowledge of the unity between mind and nature was essential to an ethical life.The mind and body, for Spinoza, act simultaneously, or as mirror images of each other, so we cannot even say that one determines the other. Thought is the consciousness of extension and extension is the manifestation of thought, and neither has any freedom from the other.

Moral realism is one of the most important approaches in meta-ethics. Accepting this approach or denying it has a unique role in the intellectual system of a moral philosopher. Louis Pojman, an eminent American philosopher, is one of the most important defenders of moral realism. He believes that skepticism and moral nihilism represented by Mackey and Harman are the most important attacks on moral realism, and if realism can be safely passed through these two scientific paths, this important ethical approach can be easily accepted.  In this article, after presenting Mackie's two fundamental arguments that is, reasoning through relativity and queerness, we try to show the inadequacies of his argument according to Pojman's point of view. In the following, we discuss the inefficiency of Harman's anti-comparison hypothesis and reveal how moral realities exist, and finally, we discuss Pojman's approach in defense of moral realism.

The role and method of acquiring virtues has an important place in Aristotle's thought. He tries to achieve the human goal of acquiring virtues in a structured way. Contemporary Aristotelian Marta Nussbaum believes that some contemporary philosophers, although they consider themselves Aristotelians, have significant differences with him in a central point. Their mistake is having a relativistic approach to Aristotelian virtues. This approach is obviously incompatible with other views of Aristotle. Aristotle was a defender of an objective and unique description of human good or human happiness. Aristotle's virtue ethics has the ability to satisfy much of what relativists are looking for while also claiming objectivity, in that being relativistic based on a specific context does not mean relativism, as in other sciences. Like medicine and navigation, attention is paid to a specific field, and this does not mean relativism. According to Nussbaum, Aristotelian virtues can explain virtues better than virtues in the view of relativists, of course, when they carefully examine the background characteristics and pay attention to common and non-common characteristics in order to make the best choice. In this article, after expressing Nussbaum's view on Aristotelian virtues, we will examine three forms of his idea and finally we will clarify how virtues are non-relative in Aristotle's thought.

Determining the meaning of the text is one of the important issues of contemporary language philosophy. Philosophical hermeneutics, in response to this problem, believes in the indeterminacy of the meaning of the text. Determining the meaning of the text has been proposed with regard to the many meanings that determination has in terms of ontology, semantics, epistemology and methodology, and among them, the determination of the meaning of the text in the sense of "discovering the meaning of the speaker" has been discussed in the light of semantic foundations.

Determining the meaning of the text is defined in the triad of "possibility, probability, and determination" and this matching has been done by emphasizing the views of Searle and Shahid Sadr with library and analytical methods and sometimes using hybrid methods and linguistic philosophy.

John Searle has explained the meaning of the text by relying on basics such as the theory of speech act, Intentionality, and collective Intentionality, and by emphasizing methods such as concentration and linguistic descriptions, classification of speech acts and rules, and by emphasizing the anatomy of the brain, and in other words, He has achieved the explanation of the organization of the institutional communication of meaning; And on the other hand, Martyr Shahid Sadr, relying on the issues of status (vaze) and Strict conjugation (qarn akid), the theory of usage (Istimal), the authority of emergence (hojat) and the linguistic system, and a special effort in the social understanding of the text (nas), relying on the method of manifestation and possibilities, in a kind of natural definition of determining their meaning in the light Social understanding is achieved.

The findings of this research show that the two researchers have a point in common in "no reference to extra-language", "regularity of language", "authenticity of appearance and rules", "contextualism" and in "confusion between the definite article and the spoken verb", "linguistic communication unit", "criterion of meaningfulness and provability", "institutional explanation of meaning", "theory of implication", "meaning and intention" and "theory of application and use" have been distinguished from each other. Therefore, the intellectual difference between the two intellectual traditions in the issue of determining meaning can be seen as arising from the intellectual paradigm of the two thinkers, on the other hand, it should be noted that the social rules of meaning and relying on the rules of consistency in Searle's view and his reliance on institutional realities and Shahid Sadr's emphasis on linguistic concentration and authenticity arising from the degree of truth and probability is more rooted in two intellectual paradigms, institutional and proof of meaning, and it should be examined in the context of meaning; Searle's reliance on individual Intentionality and his rejection of it in terms of collective Intentionality are seen very faintly in the Shahid Sadr view’s, perhaps if it were not for the fallacy of confusion between validity and truth and the science of the principles of jurisprudence did not find its language in philosophy and theoretical sciences, the attempt The theoretical approaches to connect the layer of probability to determination, or the layer of suspicion to certainty in the science of the principles of jurisprudence, do not remain incomplete. The efforts of analytical philosophy in the analysis of intention in the subjective and universal layers and his deep investigations on issues based on intention in the science of principles and the intellectual system of Shahid Sadr are effective and can change them.

Frege argues that, contrary to thoughts that are concrete entities and independent of all minds, the content of an individual's mind (sense impressions, feelings, imaginations and so on) -that he calls ideas- are incommunicable in linguistic contact. His argument is that ideas depend on the knower and thus are private. In his theory of speech acts, Searle proposes the principle of expressibility which seems to refute the possibility of incommunicability of ideas. According to the principle of expressibility, "whatever can be intended can be said". Searle claims that this principle by itself does not repudiate private language and thus does not negate the possibility of the incommunicable.In their essay, the authors try to study this principle in the light of linguistic turn, its results and epistemological implications. Searle's theory of meaning suggests that understanding of the absolute private and its being rendered into experience is not possible, and if possible, it cannot carry a meaningful expression. Accordingly, in Searle's view, even mental entities -contrary to what Frege has said- are not absolutely private and inexpressible.

In each text, there are at least three semantic layers: single words (matter), syntactic structures of language (form) and speech purposes. The present article examines the nature of proposition with respect to the third aspect, namely "the purpose of speech". The purpose of speech is the purpose of the speaker in saying a sentence. Syntactic structures are one of the linguistic possibilities in the service of the speaker. A syntactic structure, such as a declarative sentence, may be used for corresponding purposes such as statements or non-corresponding purposes such as imperatives. A declarative sentence at the level of the signifier is the subject of syntax. In contrast, a declarative sentence at the level of signification means the conception of several related meanings along with the claim that that connection is fulfilled in the real world. A proposition is a sentence at the level of signification, provided that the purpose is declaration. Therefore, a declarative sentence at the level of the signifier, which is related to the layer of syntactic meaning, is neither declarative nor exclamatory, regardless of the purpose of speech, and therefore, without a correspondence between the signifier and the purpose, a declarative sentence is merely a statement. Logicians have two views on the definition of logic. In the first definition, a proposition is something that can be true or false. Although this definition is universal and proper, it means necessary. Another definition is unilateralness and abstraction. This definition is based on the proposition in the layer of syntactic meaning and, as a result, in cases where the purpose of the declarative sentence is exclamatory, it is not exclusive of unrelated things.

According to some philosophers, not heeding historicity is one of the characteristics of analytic philosophy in comparison to other philosophical schools. That is why analytic philosophers are always being accused of ignoring historicity and blamed for this charge. Continental and traditionalist philosophers are unanimous in this regard. However, the question is whether the critics of analytic philosophy can support this accusation with sufficient and convincing arguments, or whether not taking heed of history is a baseless claim rooted in an incorrect perception and insufficient knowledge of this philosophical movement. This paper is intended to explain the critic’s claims, arguments, and proofs as to historical ignorance in analytic philosophy, on the one hand, and to describe the attention and accuracy invested in analytic philosophers’ view of history of philosophy and their arguments. The authors emphasize that, firstly, one must distinguish between essential, instrumental, and weak types of historicity. Analytic philosophers might reject essential historicity but accept a kind of weak historicity. Secondly, an emphasis on the distinction of the history of philosophical problems from history of philosophy should not be understood in the sense of anti-historicity or equating the past and presence.

The relationship between faith and action has not only been the concern of theologians, but also the philosophers have been discussing it. Wittgenstein is one of those philosophers who in both theory and practice have been concerned with the relationship between faith and action - albeit in his own way. Even in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, which may seem to be merely a pure logical and philosophical work, he has tried to address the issue of faith and action. It is due to this intention that the "sayable" and "showable" discussions are included in the treatise. From his point of view, faith is one of the facts that the believer shows in his action; therefore, there is a concomitance between the intention and action in his view. In this article, we show this claim with many evidences in Wittgenstein's works and the works of his commentators.

Deism is a philosophical and theological view of God, man, and religion. This article is an attempt to conceptually analyze deism in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, through etymology and analytical- descriptive method and seeks to provide a general classification of deism using the Clark classification. The encyclopedic definition of deism is ambiguous and the etymological dictionaries show that in the transformation of the word Deus to Deism, the etymological nuances of this word have not been taken into consideration. In contrast, with Clark's typology, one can better understand the distinction of deism from theism and the different forms of this thinking. Clarke's fourfold classification, as the first comprehensive account of deism, claims that from the first to the fourth type of deism, the affinity and similarity to Christianity gradually increases from the minimum to the maximum. The first type denies the providence of God, while believing in His unity, creation, and knowledge. The second type, while believing in the propositions of the first type of deism, considers physical laws as divine providence, but denies the inclusion of providence over moral laws. According to the third type, God’s all-governing providence is related to the moral perfections of God, and God governs this world with the attributes of justice, goodness and righteousness. The fourth type, in addition to the above teachings, also accepts the immortality and doctrine of reward and punishment. According to Clark, all the four (modern) types of deists do not believe in any Christian revelation. The concept and belief in divine revelation is one of the main difference between deism and revealed religions.

knowledge in Sadra's philosophical system are of the type of existence and it can be said that existence and knowledge are two inseparable components in his thought and science from his point of view in terms of objectivity and realization in the universe along with other beings of the universe. Sadra not only does not degrade epistemic identities because they are mentally inferior to the universe, but also because their singularity elevates their existential value above the natural world. In this article, we want to show that each class of the universe has a parallel in the world of knowledge, and each level of knowledge corresponds to a level of the universe, and in fact there is a kind of One-to-one correspondence or bijective function of mathematical between them. Thus, we will refer to the description of the components and levels of the universe in the skeptical chain of existence and also to the level of knowledge in Sadra's thought, and with a semantic approach, we will show the mathematical relation of bijective function of his ontological and epistemological system.

The teachings of Islam, containing transcendent values, make the foundation of social capital and reinforce it. On the one hand, knowledge values and concepts, in the form of a comprehensive system, actualize and develop social capital; on the other hand, social capital makes the basis for sustainable social and development by creating networks of trust and different other relations.  Hence, this study is aimed at providing solutions to develop social capital based on the Islamic value system. This descriptive applied research follows library and field method for data collection. Master and doctoral students of management at Farabi Campus of the University of Tehran were selected randomly as the research population. The elites and specialists were also selected by snowball method. All of the indicators of strategies for developing social capital revealed a high status by factor analysis and were approved. In the subjective aspect, interests were different, and in the objective aspect, knowledge organizations occupied the most important positions. In general, the objective dimension, having a path coefficient of 0.84, occupied a better position than that of the subjective aspect with a path coefficient of 0.81.

Probably the first thing that every scholar in Philosophy learns about Wittgenstein is the fact that he developed two approaches regarding language in during his life and philosophical thinking, and accordingly nobody hesitates to call him a philosopher of language (in the sense of being as a philosopher whose main concern is the analysis and exposition of language). But the fundamental necessity that made Wittgenstein to do inquiry about language has not been considered yet. The aim in present paper is to deal with this neglected issue in Wittgenstein` s though and the writes attempt to clarify that the ground of Wittgenstein’s questioning about language and also the origin of his special way of thinking is the fundamental experience of wonder on being and seeing the beings as miracles. Wittgenstein encounters the borders of language and experiences the linguistic character of human being (or his being-in-the-language) so that he can say: The existence of language is the language of existence. Our main sources for explanation of this experience will be “Notebooks”, “Tractatus” and “A Lecture on Ethics”.

As a contemporary neo-Sadraian philosopher, Muhaqeq Isfahani has proposed his own account of the ontological argument for the existence of Allah. This account of the argument is unprecedented and has caught the attention of many contemporary thinkers. There have been proposed five accounts of this argument upon three pivots. First is the concept of necessary being as a mental concept. Second is the concept of necessary being so far as it denotes something beyond the concept. And third is the very reality of necessary being existing by itself in the outside world. Each of the above accounts is open to some criticisms. Prof. Mahdi Ha’iri Yazdi has leveled four criticisms at that account of the argument such as counter-argument, begging the question, the confusion of categorical proposition with non-categorical one. The proponents of ontological argument have raised objections to Ha’iri’s criticisms. Most of those objections are not valid for they stem from the insufficient consideration of the fact that concepts such as “necessary being”, “God”, “partner of Creator” and the like are philosophical secondary intelligible. Accordingly, most of Prof. Ha’iri’s criticisms against Muhaqeq Ishafani are valid and thus the ontological argument fails to prove the existence of Allah.

Kant, the famous German philosopher, has tried in his important book, Critique of Pure Reason to give the conditions of possibility of universal and necessary knowledge and therewith Specify bound of understanding. Synthetic a priori judgment could only able, on Kant’s viewpoint, if the pure forms of time and space determine given representation on intuition. He try to show that pure forms of understanding are known as conditions of Objective empirical judgment. On his viewpoint, all conditions of recognition are also limited to the transcendental unity of perception. Kant’s theory of transcendental I and his explanation for the conditions of possibility of knowledge put matter to Compare with the doctrine of intuitive knowledge and theory of the Appearance of a perceptions plurality in the philosophical system of Allameh Tabatabaei. He knows the conditions of possibility of every knowledge, even theoretical one, dependent on ontological unity and connection of subject and object. He is the first philosopher in the tradition of Islamic Philosophy who give a creative explanation for the appearance of a plurality perceptions and Circumstance of obtain basic course concepts. This article is going to describe and interpret mechanism of possibility of knowledge in two philosophical system of Allameh Tabatabaei and Kant

Emotivism is one of the most important and, at the same time, most extreme non-cognitive theories in the field of ethics. As the most important moral theory of the 20th century, this theory was influenced by Alfred Ayer (1910-1910), being influenced by the teachings of the Vienna circle and classical analytic philosophers of the first period such as Frege, Russell, Moore and Wittgenstein. This theory believes that morality is nothing but the appearance of individual emotions and feelings. As is clear, such an attitude to ethics will lead to ethical relativism, regardless of opposing rationality and directing humsn emotions toward epistemology. In this research, we will merely examine and criticize the attitude in the light of the principle of verification as the most important doctrine of the Vienna circle. This study, using analytical method, has come to the conclusion that the theory of emotionality has nothing except the Vienna Circle principle of verification and, therefore, by criticizing this principle, the theory of emotivism would be devoid of any scientific point of view in the field of ethics.

Conatus, the law of self-preservation, is an inherent striving of beings to persist on its own being.. Spinoza, after explaining the conatus and justifying the problem of self-destruction (suicide), rejected many of common concepts of his predecessors’ philosophical tradition and redefined them in a different way by conatus doctrine. Spinoza denied teleological interpretation of world events and offered a nonteleological explanation of them by “desire” and “appetite” that rooted in the conatus principle. Spinoza Presents special interpretation of Ethical act root and lays the ethical good in the “Human will” and in the “nature of the objects”. For Spinoza, the ethics rooted in philosophical necessity, therefore, he tries to establish his own ethics on a strong foundation- that is individual egoism (self-interest) - which is rooted in the conatus doctrine

This study aimed to identify the relationship between psychological capital and organizational identity has been done in the National Gas Company of Mashhad. To study the psychological capital from Lufthansa questionnaire (2007) and to study organizational identity from Cheney questionnaire (1983) was used. The results of this study, both descriptive and inferential statistics have been analyzed.In the level of description from parameters of frequency, percentage, etc. and inferential have also benefited from structural equation. The population consisted of all employees in Mashhad gas is about 250 people, that according to Cochran formula the sample size was 152 people. To verify the validity of the content and appearance of expert supervision and using confirmatory factor analysis was used that The result indicated approved questionnaire.also from The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to verify the questionnaire.and reliability respectively at the level 0/92 and 0/87 for psychological capital and organizational identity was. The results of the test showed that the main hypothesis in this organization there is a relationship between psychological capital and organizational identity. Also the results of the research of Sub assumptions showed thatAmong the components of psychological capital (hope and resilience) there is no relationship with organizational identity.