جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "وجود محمولی" در نشریات گروه "علوم قرآن و حدیث"

The issue under study in this article lies in surveying common and different points in Kant and Suhrawardi's concept of existence. Accordingly, we have studied the opinions of these two Western and Eastern philosophers about the division of concepts, the position of the concept of existence among the concepts as well as the influence of their views on the proofs for the existence of God. It can be said that Kant considers existence as being conventional and only of one meaning, that is the relations found between the subject and the predicate of propositions. While Suhrawardi, has viewed the concept of existence as being of three meanings, one conventional as that of Kant and the other non-conventional. As for proving the existence of God, their differences would be considerable as demanded by their considerations on the concept of existence.

The term copulative existence is used in three different ways: the first being of non-nominal meaning that belongs to propositions as connective element as opposed to propositional being in existential propositions which is nominal meaning i.e. taken by itself, it is conceivable with no other concept from without. In second usage copulative existence is taken as being in itself for other than itself. According to third usage which is coined by Mulla Sadra this term is taken to mean a dependent being as against independent existence in discussions of cause and effect. According to Mulla Sadra existence of all contingent beings is but the very existential poverty and a pure relation to the Cause. That is why they are called wojūd-e-rābet ­i.e. copulative being while earlier philosophers had deemed such beings as related to the cause or in their term wojūd-e-rābeti. The present article is to survey these three terms and gives a due attention to the explanation of copulative being in transcendent theosophy.