جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « فیلسوف » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Muhammad ibn Zakaria al-Razi is one of the most challenging Thinkers in the history of science in the Islamic world that the challenge to his character and views has continued since his life. Regardless of the challenge of his philosophical or medical views or lifestyle, one of these wide-ranging challenges is the discussion of Zakaria''s relationship with philosophical thought and his place and position in philosophy. On the one hand, some consider the most important aspect of Razi''s scientific personality to be his medical dimension, and consider Razi''s thoughts on philosophy and theology as an exaggeration of his scientific personality and On the other hand some, while accepting his position in medicine , consider the most important aspect of Razi''s scientific personality to be his philosophical-theological views In such a way that he is compared to the scientists of the Enlightenment in free thought and rationalism, and he is even considered the only philosopher in the Islamic world. Now that the passage of time has made it easier to make biased judgments, the study of Razi''s surviving works shows that there is enough evidence (including: Razi''s self-defense, the multiplicity of philosophical writings, the presentation of novel ideas, etc.) To call the Muhammad ibn Zakaria al-Razi as a philosopher and his difference with other philosophers is not in his distance from philosophical thought, but in his method and dissenting views on philosophical and theological issues. Now that the passage of time has made it easier to make biased judgments, the study of Razi''s surviving works shows that there is enough evidence (including: Razi''s self-defense, the multiplicity of philosophical writings, the presentation of novel ideas, etc.)to call the Muhammad ibn Zakaria al-Razi as a philosopher And his difference with other philosophers is not in his distance from philosophical thought, but in his method and dissenting views on philosophical and theological issues.

Afzal –al-Din Ghilani was a prominent student of Abul Abas lokari and through Bahmanyar is considered as one of the Avicenna’s students. He has educated great philosophers and the series of his students with two intermediaries leads to Khajih Nasir – al – Din Tousi. On the contrary Farid –al-Din Ghilani – who is contemporary with Afzal –al-Din Ghilani – is like minded and comrade with Ghazali that has expressed his opposition and protest to philosophy and philosophers in his book; Hodous –al-Alam. Some of writers have unified these two distinct and different characters and judged incorrectly. In this article, which has been written in a documentary manner and with logical analysis,, According to some evidence, it will be explained that Afzal –al- Din and Farid –al- Din Ghilani are two scientific and personal characters. Among these evidences are based on the years of Fridaldin's life, which he mentioned in his works on occasion, as well as evidences from the content of the book Hudood al-Alam, which can strengthen the possibility of the philosopher Ghilani duality from the theologian Ghilani

 The scholars have mentioned three things as the criteria for distinguishing sciences: the subject matter, the method, and the purpose. The present study, conducted through an analytical-descriptive method, aims at finding the distinction between the philosophy and other sciences. The important finding of the study is that, firstly, the criterion for distinguishing philosophy from other sciences is the subject matter, not the method. Secondly, we found nothing in the statements of early philosophers to the effect that the feature and the criterion of the philosophy is the rational method. Thirdly, the Islamic philosophy is the philosophy nourished by revelation in its foundations and explanation of its subject matter.

By utopia it means a society that enjoys certain political, economic, social, and educational structures; a society that can lead the maximum number of its members to maximum happiness. As a matter of fact, by writing utopian books, the authors are not aimed at erecting such utopia in their country or in other country. According to Plato, these works are considered to be just like patterns that all countries can benefit from them and following which attain their happiness. Utopianism first was developed by Plato and then other philosophers in the world of Islam and Christianity followed him. Here we are not going to deal with the well known figures in the field of utopian in the world, but rather intend to cast some light on the training of children in the utopia of reformers and philosophers. Based on the studies made on training, the signification of training has two meanings: general and particular meaning. Both meanings stress heavily on the importance of training of children and youth and consider it as a means of bringing about changes in a society. In this article the views of the Eastern and Western philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Farabi, Tomasho Kampalana, and Thomas More on the notion of utopia have been studied. Almost all of them followed the same universal and logical principle. In certain issues such as religion, man, and God there are certain differences between the Western and the Eastern utopias. To sum up, while spirituality and divinity constitute the gist of Eastern utopia, the Western utopia stresses on materiality and corporeality and this point is palpable in their training of children. On the whole, utopians strongly stress on education and training and look at training as a chief factor behind any peaceful social change.

This article is an attempt to show that how the meanings of the words “philosophy” and “philosopher” change in Plato’s Phaedo in comparison with his early Socratic dialogues. The Phaedo is Plato’s interpretation of Socrates’ life, philosophy and death, in light of Orphic and Pythagorean eschatological doctrines. In this interpretation, Plato reveals his problem of epistemological pessimism and proposes its solution. He regards Socrates as the ideal philosopher, being aware of his own ignorance and the epistemic obstacles of this world, becomes capable to purify his soul from the human and corporeal concerns and make the soul ready for flying out of its bodily prison, so that the soul could gain pure knowledge in the supreme and divine realm of immateriality. Thus, Plato provides his own definitions of the words “philosophy” and “philosopher” in the Phaedo, according to which “philosophy” is the way of purification and salvation of the soul, and the “philosopher” is the one who is willingly training for dying in order to release his soul from confines of the mundane world in search of pure knowledge.

There have been different readings of Plato’s works and treatises, especially in relation to “Republic”. Among them, treatises of this statesman and sophist are of special importance. Plato, in “Sophist”, writes that he would have a sufficient inquiry on “Philosopher” in a near future. This statement has led some researchers to look for Plato’s lost book on the “philosopher”. Does the statement really mean that he had in mind to write the book “Philosopher” especially considering the fact that he had written the “Statesman” before this? This paper, by focusing on the different readings, studies the relationship between “Sophist” and “Statesman”, and claims that writing of an independent treatise by Plato, under the name of “Philosopher” was not what he intended to do. In fact, by writing “Sophist” and “Statesman” he had characterized “Philosopher” to his readers. All the characteristics of the “Philosopher” are available in the previous treatises. This article drawing on the internal logic of Plato’s thought, this claim has been investigated from different perspectives.

In his political plan, Farabi sought to administer his metaphysical project in the human world. Politics is an inseparable part of human life and the only political project that can ensure mankind’s welfare and felicity in his worldly and otherworldly life is the Utopia politics which is based on Utopia. From Farabi’s perspective, politics is synonymous with educating and nurturing the people in Utopia and it works to realize the goals of the ruler of Utopia. The purpose of educating the people of the city has said to be the establishing of a Divine order in the human city. In fact, felicity is held to be achievable only within the framework and the zone of Allah’s law and order. Therefore, the philosopher-prophet, as the ruler of the city, seeks the political administration of the truth and also to administer the Divine commandment and order in the human life. Thus, a new horizon and perspective towards the truth and existence is opened towards the residents of the Utopia and the humanity of mankind is consolidated there. On the other hand, Utopia works like the illumination of the existence; it is the only arena in which existence is realized and manifested.

God is a constant and invariable Being who is not influenced by time and place or spatial-temporal existing objects or creatures. On the other hand, He is fully aware of the particulars which are variable and whose change will, at the first glance, lead to change in God's knowledge and then in His essence. The present paper is mainly concerned with whether or not God's knowledge of the particulars is compatible with invariability of God's knowledge and essence of God.The researcher tries to examine how the works of famous philosophers and theologians consider God as an invariable Being on the one hand and as aware of the particulars, on the other hand. The most important research findings show that famous philosophers have proposed different solutions based on different approaches. It seems that Avicena's view is the most challenging view of these philosophers. Furthermore, Fazil Miqdad's view should be considered a new headline in the subject of God's knowledge in Islamic theology.

The “Digression” in Plato’s Theaetetus (172-177) compares between philosopher’s life and orator’s of which I’m going to render an analytic report. There are some questions: how and why Plato’s discussion on the general definition of “Knowledge” is led to the “Digression” and what are the key themes of it? What is the role of the “Digression” in the Theaetetus? The “Digression”, apparently and besides the content, not conflicts with the whole of the Theaetetus. Because Plato, naturally and not conventionally, transits to the “Digression”, from the process of a judgment on the superiority of some people to others. After all, the content of “Digression” is in consistence with Plato’s doctrines. The apparent conclusion of the Theaetetus, relying on the individuals, is negative. However, the “Digression”, explicitly or implicitly, refers to the previous existence of the Forms. But, regarding to the “Digression”, the impossibility of the definition of “Knowledge” without universal Forms is the important message of the Dialogue.

The main aim of this paper is considering and criticizing knowledge, will and power of God and human from the viewpoint of philosophers and theologians. The paper has three sections: The first section is devoted to some preliminary definitions; in the second section, I explain and criticize views of some philosophers and theologians about knowledge, will and power of God and human; and in the third section, I conclude the preferred views about the mentioned topics.

The literary works of any nation reveal the trend of its thoughts and wisdom; analyzing the literary works from different perspectives, therefore, contribute to showing this trend. The philosophical thought in Iran entered a new era or “declining stage”, especially after the fifth century onward, particularly marked with the writing of Tahafot-al-falasefe. Indeed, analyzing the intellectual works of this era shows the destiny of philosophy and philosophers of this period. Khaghani leads those opposing philosophy and philosophers in Persian poetry, who can be considered as unique and unprecedented.Looking at the intellectual background of Khaghani’s era and the effect thereof on his viewpoints, this study investigates philosophy and philosophers from his point of view, citing a number of the instances of his philosophical “combat” and challenging the philosophers by him. The study then deals with Intellect with regard to other texts. It leads to the conclusion that Khaghani has dealt with wisdom from two perspectives: the spiritual wisdom and the material one. In fact, he has equated wisdom with the heart and spirit. So, in spite of what is prevalent, not only has he not devaluated, but praised it as well. The Intellect looked down upon by Khaghani is against the spirit; It is not the spiritual wisdom.

In this paper, according to very Allamah's works, we try to consider if he is truly a theologian or a philosopher. On the base of this inquiry there are only eight cases which he, in the face of philosophers, chooses theories of theologians in preference to philosophers. Of course three cases of them were rejected and we are not justified to call him a theologian. Also twenty one cases are mentioned that he, in the face of theological theories, prefers theories of philosophers to them. In a section of the paper Eshmitke's idea based on which he is a theologian was criticized. Ultimately put emphasis on this point that Allamah certainly is an Islamic philosopher as apposed to a theologian. To attribute him to both realms, because of big difference between theological and philosophical fundamental doctrines, is impossible.