jalal paykani

Scientific explanations of religious experience are a serious challenge for religious experience. In the second half of the 20th century, cognitive science has involved itself with the issue of religion. Among the approaches of this knowledge, the conceptual metaphor approach of Lakoff and Johnson has a special place; Especially the claim of the thinkers of this field that the mind is basically physical and abstract concepts are mostly metaphorical is a very serious challenge for religious experience. In examining the critical view of the approach of conceptual metaphors, we will notice the results that are in favor of the approach of religious experience; Due to the religious experience, the generalization and convergence of the central metaphor is degraded. On the other hand, religious experience makes us believe that even with lived experience, religious matters are not basic or objective categories that do not require metaphors. On the other hand, by examining the religious experience, we are convinced to believe that man, as a being who has the ability to perceive metaphysical matters, inevitably has a non-physical essence; Because the understanding of metaphysical matters requires dimensions beyond the physical dimension. In this research, the aim is to examine the view of this approach to religious experience and against those who defend religious experience.

Method and material:

The research was done with descriptive research method. First, conceptual metaphors have been examined with the approach of George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, and then known religious experiences have been discussed. In the next step, a critical look at conceptual metaphors for religious experience and possible answers from philosophers of religion is included.The view of the metaphor-oriented approach in science or cognitive sciences is an experimental view, the aim of which is to deal with the cognitive aspect of language. The mentioned approach in cognitive linguistics is also called empirical realism. The study course of this linguistic approach is interdisciplinary; In this way, by studying the language, he intends to respond to the ontological and epistemological developments in dealing with the relationship between religious experience and language. If the basis of this approach is the above view, this view in dealing with religious experience will lead to a multi-directional interaction, which in the view of philosophers and thinkers, the metaphor-oriented approach will end in physical experience and physicality view. In this chapter, while dealing with the main and secondary issues, the author's main goal, which is to investigate the role of conceptual metaphors in explaining religious knowledge, is clarified.

The results of this research indicate that conceptual metaphors are not 100% applicable to the issue of experience and religious experiences and the language of reporting the aforementioned experiences, and since there are possibilities of disconfirming the rule of metaphorical language, it cannot be accepted. Although the main representatives of conceptual metaphors approach believe that this approach (metaphor-based approach) has self-evident principles, but on the other hand, they do not know it completely and without exception that this self-sewing issue is self-evident and indisputable.

It does not seem that the philosophers of the metaphor-oriented approach are in the direction of developing a better interaction between science and religion, or that they want to consider the interaction between conceptual metaphors in scientific knowledge and the problem of religious experience. ; Rather, with the attitude that especially the philosophers of the metaphor-oriented approach have taken, they intend to show that the examples of knowledge of religious experience are abstract things that the human mind simulates on the basis of empirical and tangible things. And in a sense, religious experiences are made from empirical facts, and for this purpose, the mind attributes imaginary schemas from physical objects to metaphysical and extrasensory matters; At the same time, this relationship is completely virtual and metaphorical. Based on the ontological results of this approach, it cannot be assumed that the religious experience indicates and observes the truth in recognizing the examples of religion, and hence the language that is used to give meaning to religious propositions. It has been purely unreal and virtual.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the function of religious experience in making sense of life from William James’ point of view along with the description and analysis of the critiques. He considers the religious experience as a necessary and sufficient condition for discovering meaning. He considers religion as something individual. With the evidence he provides for the subjectivity of emotions and the privacy of the mental life, we find out that James' views correspond with the new science and the specificity of religious experience and its meaning. Also, James' empirical explanations are uncertain and he does not see the need to prove it rationally. Empirical explanations such as search for meaning by all human beings and the falsification of meaning and the reduction of meaning to purpose indicate that the search for meaning is the most fundamental driving force in life and the reason for man’s religious sense. James looks more at the sense of meaning than the meaning itself. James' view of religious experience and meaning is influenced by pragmatic thinking about utility.

Nasr’s philosophy of Art contains several affirmative components such as connecting with tradition, the sacredness, the truth of being, utility of art in ordinary life and etc. First we have explained those components. on the other hand, his theory contains several negative components such as the critic of the modern art, the critic of utilitarianism, the critic of the artist’s central role and etc. These aspects, too, have been explained in this paper. Following description, we have deal with this question: What the contemporary artist or audience of artwork would gain if he looks to art from Nasr’s view point.

The proof of possibility and necessity was first described by Ibn Sina and he called it the argument of the truthful ones. Thomas Aquinas Under the influence of Islamic philosophers has also provided some proof of this argument And it's the third path of his theology. Mulla Sadra, after presenting the proof of the possibility of cinema and the introduction of criticism Drawing on the original principles of transcendent wisdom, he has devised a new version of the Siddiqin argument. And He knows it the way of prophets, mystics and divine philosophers. The present article, while presenting an analysis of these three interpretations and examining their subscriptions and ratings, shows that First, none of these interpretations are error-free. Secondly, Ibn Sina's argument is more honorable than that of Thomas and Mulla Sadra's argument both. Reasoning from Essence to Essence and Attributes, systematically explaining and justifying causality, and drawing a unified relationship between God and the world on the basis of the possibility of poverty, originality, and the objective existence of existence, and the need for distant nullification and supremacy, are the most important aspects of the Sadrian argument.

This paper is Review of History: What and Why?byBeverleySouthgate. Our findings show that this book is not an original work which contains speculations of the author, but is an elementary text book about one of the most important questions of the philosophy of history, i.e. has history any kind of objectivity? In a good manner, he gathered views of the formers as well as latters. Also, he shows that how the history, as a disciplineis affected by other fields of humanities. Its language is simple and has a logical structure. But relativistic and subjectivist approach of the author is one of the challenging aspects of this book in Iranian philosophical atmosphere. This book is old and its subject matters are very limited.

There is always an inevitable conflict between Hume’s naturalistic ambitions and his skeptical judgments. Some of his contemporary critics accused him of atheism because the foundations of his naturalistic system restricted the human knowledge to the human nature, thus destroying his contemporary naturalistic apologies. After Hume’s death, his critics provided a naturalistic interpretation of his philosophical system. In this paper, we will first show that Hume’s ambitions for establishment of ethics led him to the human nature, making his research fall into a skeptical trap. We will then evaluate the truth or falsity of the atheistic or skeptical accusation through an analysis of the Humean thought, an investigation of his critics and advocates, and an exposition of hidden motivations behind his skepticisms. In the end, we seek to free his naturalism from skepticism, showing that even his skeptically-oriented research is in conflict with consequences of denying God. We have found that skepticism is not an instrument for undermining intellectual foundations; it is instead a bridge for reaching the goal. Thus, Hume deserves to be called a “Rational Moralist.”

One of the debates concerning Hume’s Philosophy is whether he believes in God. Through investigating his own works and extraction of his assertions concerning God, we try in this paper to examine the internal consistency of his system. In order to do this, we shall analytically examine whether the current tags attached to him are consistent with implications of his works. This research shows that it is problematic to call him an “atheist” or an “agnostic”. Furthermore, the findings of this paper shows that his minimal belief in God can be found in all of his works. Finally, according to the results, it is suggested to call him a weak or non-dogmatic agnostic.

According to virtue epistemology, the spiritual transcendence of subject (or agent of knowledge) is one of the effective elements in knowledge acquiring. MullaSadra’s epistemic theory, known as the unity of the rational and the reasonable, has certain similarities with virtue epistemology, because for him, the relation between the subject and the belief or knowledge is transcendental and existential. According to him, in the first step, the relation between the subject and the belief or knowledge is causal. The characteristics of causal relations is that the cause transmits it’s properties to the effect; i.e. the virtues of the subject transmits to the belief and the epistemic property of the belief transmits to the subject and elevates his existential intensity. In the next step of the process of knowledge, the relation between the belief and the subject is unitary compositionof the matter with the form. To add rational belief to the subject results in his spiritual transcendence and this results in supplying the context of producing beliefs which their truth probability is high.

Generally, Cartesian and Humean doubts are considered as two types of different and diverse doubts. The first one is imperative and the second one is real. Although Cartesian and Humean points of view about doubt from one perspective reflect the fact that, not only the Humean doubt is not in continuity with the Cartesian doubt, but it has fundamental differences with it in terms of forms and contents. On the other hand, there are some elements indicating that the Humean doubt is unreal and incomplete. So, in this regard, it is possible to see the Humean doubt as being the same as the Cartesian doubt that has an imperative characteristic. In this paper, we try to represent similarities and differences between these two philosophers about this topic by focusing on doubts in Hume’s works and we will briefly refer to the Cartesian doubt; and see whether the common idea about the relation between the skepticisms of these two philosophers is true or not.

Comparison of Mula Sadra’s epistemology theory and virtual epistemology theories of Zagzebski and Platinga infers that the former’s theory can be categorized as a virtual epistemology. Platinga believes in virtue of forming faculties and Zagzebski believes in function of intellectual power in forming episteme. In fact, both of them believe is some aspects of the elements effective in formation and development of belief so that none of the theories are free of objection. Mula Sadra, on the other hand, believes in virtue of belief forming faculties, effect of moral faculties function on intellectual faculties, and their interactive function in forming belief and truth conductivity process. Plantinga argues that only belief forming faculties may form beliefs, while Zagzebski and Mula Sadra argue that moral faculties prepare the ground form formation of true beliefs and that belief formation is an attribute of belief forming faculties. In addition to belief forming and ground preparing faculties, Mula Sadra proposes reliability and truth conductivity processes of revelation and inspiration as two other processes that form reliable and true beliefs.

Brand Blanshard is one of the contemporary famous philosophers، especially because of his Ideas on religious epistemology. He defends rationalism and evidentialism in religious epistemology and therefore criticizes fideism. He holds that rationality is the main character of all kinds of beliefs، including religious belief. But، in his Idealism، Blansahrd finds a place for the source of being and universe، which stands in sharp contradiction with traditional concept of God. In this paper we show that some times، his evidentialism is very radical and in compatible with contemporary steams. Some of his claims are not acceptable، such as this assertion that today scientific approach is absolutely dominate and religious approach is absolutely condemn.

In history of philosophy، the problem of our knowledge about external world is one of considerable topics and the most important version of that is found in René Descartes. In recent decades، a new approach called Externalism have emerged that seems can respond to this problem especially Process Confidentialism approach. In present article، it have been shown that this theory because of almost tolerable standards and avoidance of strict Cartesian requirements introduce an almost new perspective.