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

One of the important issues in philosophy and mysticism, with considerable ontological and epistemological effects, is explaining the truth of fact-itself (nafs al-amr). This is because the truth of fact-itself is directly related to affirmation and falsification of epistemic propositions and statements. The subject of the present inquiry is a comparative investigation of the views of Islamic philosophers and mystics regarding the truth of fact-itself in a descriptive-analytical method. The related data were gathered through library studies. The inquiry aims at a general expression and stating the common and different points among the views of most philosophers and mystics regarding the fact-itself and presenting a brief analysis on them. The most important findings of the inquiry are as follows: the mystics’ interpretations of the fact-itself are focused on the ontological sphere and are proposed for explaining the existential unity of the universe. But the philosophers’ interpretations are focused on the epistemological sphere and aim at explaining the verity and falsity of the epistemic propositions. According to this approach, some of the philosophers’ interpretations such as ‘fact and outside in particular sense’, ‘active intellect’, and ‘existence-self’, are not the precise and right interpretations of fact-itself. But, some others such as ‘general affirmation’ or ‘absolute container of affirmation of external realities’ and ‘container of rational affirmation of the facts’ are justifiable. It seems that ‘thing-itself’ (nafs al-shayʾ) is the most precise and most comprehensive interpretation that enjoys the capability to explain the verity and falsity of any epistemic proposition.

According to the explicit texts in the Holy Quran, there are corporeal features in the hereafter. However, there have been disputes among the Muslim thinkers and philosophers and a wide variety of views have been presented by them. These range from the views that regard the hereafter as just spiritual to those that consider it as merely corporeal. Among those who consider the hereafter as both spiritual and corporeal, some maintain that the “ideal body” is the body in the other world, and some others have spoken of the elemental material body, and still some others have considered the body in the hereafter to be an immaterial corporeal body. Accordingly, they have spoken of the differences between the worldly and otherworldly bodies. Those who hold this view have even adduced the Quranic verses. In this article, we have tried, after reporting those various views and reviewing them, to specify the right view.

As one of the seekers after truth, Ghazali's attention is directed to the group of philosophers more than any other groups. He believes that their way of discovering the truth is not efficient. He divides philosophers into materialists, naturalists and metaphysicians and proposes twenty issues in theology according to seventeen of which he considers philosophers as heretic and according to three of which as disbelievers.
This research which uses a descriptive-analytical method, deals with Ghazali’s motivations and stances towards philosophy and philosophers and the criticisms he directs to them. Investigating the views of Ghazali, the paper reaches the conclusion Ghazali's pretext for excommunicating the philosophers is not consistent with the religious and theological beliefs confirmed by him. Motivations have a great effect on Ghazali’s disagreement with philosophy which is not consistent with his reality-seeking.

Being a matter of research by great thinkers through history, determinism and free will of human being is considered one of the most significant topics in the realm of Quranic interpretation and philosophy. Some have regarded human being as a being with predetermined actions in this world while the majority insist on his free will. The verses of the Quran are also divided into two categories: one seems to indicate determinism and the other clearly proves free will. Philosophers have benefited from the arguments of divine justice and wisdom towards proving free will. The view holding free will has confronted certain challenges the most significant of which is the problems concerning destiny and providence, as well as the anterior knowledge of God about the voluntary acts of human being. Thus proving incapable of responding to those objections, some scholars have recognized determinism. On the other hand, criticizing opponents views, numerous commentators and philosophers have rightly explained these issues. Therefore, the foundations of the view supporting free will are well established and the objections in this regard eliminated.