جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « عقل انسانی » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

The philosophy of Middle Ages began with the stances of Saint Augustine. In his teaching “I am guilty, therefore I exist” he defines the truth and existence of the human for the first time based on a human, non-divine action. The examination of the evolution from Saint Augustine’s foregoing statement to that of Descartes (I think, therefore I am) on the one hand shows the long-lasting challenge in solving the relationship between perception and truth, and on the other hand, determines the roots of modernism in some opinions suggested in Middle Ages. This article explains some of the most fundamental opinions of the Middle Ages thinkers such as Abelard’s Skeptism theory as the instrument to attain the truth, Saint Francis’ point that the truth is more a lowly thing within the human rather than a sublime matter, Voluntaryism and individualism of William of Ockham and Nicholas of Autrecourt, etc. This way, it clarifies the way the human intellect is represented in the modern age and the procedure that led to the production of the proposition “I think, therefore I am.” The study was descriptive-analytical in nature and used indicative reasoning for data analysis purposes. The findings revealed that the basis of Descartes’ philosophy (as the father of modern philosophy) is adopted from Saint Augustine’s thoughts. In other words, not only the beginning of the Middle Ages but also the establishment of the modern age should be attributed to Saint Augustine.

In Islamic teachings, human intellect has known to be of such a high status as inner hujjaht and following or opposing it one may attain happiness or misery respectively. As for its essence and its place in perceiving religious teachings, it has long been considered by religious scholars and various views have emerged in this regard. One of the points raised in this issue is that human reason is a force dividable into deep and superficial or divine and instrumental (philosophical) of which only deep or divine intellect has to do with perceiving religious teachings. In this paper, through a descriptive and analytical method, we examine and critique this theory, we have revealed that the viewpoint is not defensible and causes many objections.

The study of the relationship of ethics and politics in the thought of Miskawayh Razi forms the problem of this paper, which seeks to prevent any prejudice in the case of priority and Late between the ethics and politics, and their compliance. Their relationship has been investigated in terms of points of conceptual Intersection and Confluence as intermittent circles. A theoretical explanation of such a relation is based on Jürgen Habermas’s model in order to examine the relation of ethics and politics in the history of Western political thought. Based on this theory, the “solidarity” of ethics and politics on the axis of the points of conceptual Intersection and Confluence can be explained, as the ending of such points is considered to be the beginning of the “breakup” of these two arenas. Based on this theory, the present article seeks to analyze and process the problem that how can be explained the axis of intersection and the points of Confluence of ethics and politics in Miskawayh Razi’s political thought. Using the methods of qualitative analysis in the explanation and interpretation of the information and texts available in this regard, the present study concluded that in Miskawayh Razi’s political thought the ethics and politics on the circuit of “well-being and happiness” have confluence, and the achievement of prosperity in this world can be made possible through life in a city, with the use of the best possible ways of exercising power in the city.

Reason and reasoning are highly important from the viewpoint of Quranic verses and traditions. Reason no doubt plays an unparalleled role alongside narrated sources in discovering religious truths. There are however different views concerning the nature of reason and the method of reasoning. According to Mirza Mahdi Isfahani the reason used by Quranic verses and traditions is different from the reason used in secular sciences. It is divine reason that is helpful in acquiring religious knowledge. Human reason, a faculty of soul, which generates acquired knowledge, is but an obstacle to obtaining divine knowledge. Divine reason is a beam of light that lies outside human beings. As something self-evident, it is not the same as soul which is not self-evident. This article explains this theory and shows that the arguments presented cannot substantiate the claim. [In addition], the theory is per se faced with many strong objections.

The Sophists were the first ancient thinkers who considered the issue of man as the main subject of philosophy. They were the first to change the direction of philosophical research from phusis to nomos. Almost at the same time and a short while after the rise of the Sophists, in spite of their disagreements with and fundamental oppositions to these thinkers, Socrates, Plato, and also Aristotle introduced man as the primary concern of philosophical theories. This was the main commonality between the views of the Sophists and ancient philosophers. On the other hand, there is also a kind of formal proximity between Socrates and the Sophists in terms of their method of dialectics and discourse. However, since Socrates considers a fixed criterion for knowledge which is free from sense impressions, he criticizes Protagoras’ statement as to “Man is the measure of all things”, and argues that Protagoras focuses on individual man and considers the truth to be relative. In this way, a comparative study of the ideas of the Sophists and philosophers reveals that both groups followed the same subject and method but had different purposes. The Sophists’ purpose was teaching, while philosophers sought their end in knowing the truth. This paper aims to discover the differences and similarities between these two approaches. In doing so, it initially deliberates accurately over their distinctive ideas and then clearly explains that some of the philosophical findings of the Sophists, in spite of their historical notoriety, have exercised some lasting effects on contemporary philosophy. In other words, by changing the direction of philosophy’s attention to the problem of man, in a sense, they developed the basis for modern philosophy.

The Eckankar anthropology, like many of its teachings, contains many contradictions. The Eckankar man sometimes has satanic status and sometimes, divine status. Eckists, like many other cults, have admitted the spiritual dimension of man. The study of human spirit as the most important characteristic of many NRMs can review their belief in man. Spirit and spirit belief can be regarded just as a pretext to keep away from monotheistic belief in God and religious belief in the Resurrection. The attitude of these pseudo-religions to the human mind, as one of the most important divine gifts which stimulates the intellect, is very important and necessary. Since contradiction and unreasonable, odd remarks is abundantly found in these pseudo-religions, mind and mental, intellectual analysis are introduced as highways of astray. In addition, in these pseudo-religions periodic look at human leads to doctrines of Reincarnation and it is regarded as a certain principle.