جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "ناخودآگاه" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

One of the divisions of knowledge proposed in Mulla Sadra’s Philosophy is its division to simple and compound. In his philosophy,this division corresponds to the same division of ignorance. As he occasionally addresses in his works, simple knowledge is a kind of knowledge in which someone knows something without being conscious of his knowledge and its object, while compound knowledge is a kind of knowledge in which the knower knows something and is conscious of his knowledge and its object. In this paper, in the context of discovery we have used the method of content analysis and in the context of justification the method of conceptual and rational analysis of ontological and epistemological foundations. Our aim is to answer this main question that what is simple and compound Knowledge, and what are the origins and capacities of this division, based on Mulla Sadra’s philosophical bases. We have shown that although this division is one of Mulla Sadra's innovations, its roots are found in Avicenna’s thought, specifically the distinction he makes between consciousness and consciousness of consciousness. In the second part, it has been presented that this division has capabilities to explain some of the most important philosophical topics, including the innate knowledge (ilm fetri) and the knowledge of corporeal beings. Besides, this division has the capacity for conducting comparative philosophical studies in some areas related to the consciousness studies in the contemporary philosophy of mind, including the levels of self-consciousness and the difference between conscious and unconscious mental states.

Freud's approach toward understanding art is limited to some factors. He overemphasizes the neural aspects of artistic experience. His analysis of artists, to a great extent, depends on his need to expand and indicate the psychoanalytic theory he was working on. He confessed that he failed to confront art's official and technical aspects, and psychoanalysis has not yet been able to realize the artist's intrinsic "secret" and "mysterious ability" in creating a work of art. Freud investigated the artist's individual unconscious for the origin of creating a work of art. Freud's view of art can be seen as a continuation of the modern aesthetic view of art and at the same time expresses its criticality. We are faced with a different approach to art and the beginning of a work of art. In this approach, Heidegger sees the beginning of the work of art as separate from the artist and his personal life and tries to connect art with the truth. On this basis, he gives a new interpretation of art. This study explored the foundations, components, and assumptions of psychoanalytic interpretation of art. According to Heidegger, one of the places where truth is realized is in art. Moreover, based on Heideggerian thought on art and poetic thought, this study examined the strengths and weaknesses of psychoanalytic interpretation of art and attempted to explore the relationship between art and truth in psychoanalytic interpretation and Heidegger's interpretation of art.

Derrida’s deconstruction is formed in relation to different philosophical movements such as existentialism، phenomenology، and structuralism. In this inquiry، we will search the origin of deconstruction in texts and philosophy of Friedrisch Nietzsche. We will show that Derrida’s thought is a development of Nietzsche’s critic of metaphysical thought. Most important Derridean concepts such as metaphysics of presence، diferrance، and critic of logocentrism are basically Nietzschean. Nietzsche was very pessimistic about philosophical thought and sought a nonphilosophical and nontheoretical thought. He introduced art as a view to the world that is free from limitations of theoretical thought. In Derrida، also، we can see this pessimistic view to philosophical thought، but he insists that this view is formed inside of philosophical thought. He introduced a practical thought instead of theoretical thought and systematically criticized the latter. We will show that Derrida’s deconstruction is an attempt to make a distance from theoretical thought and، thus، is a Nietzschean movement. This is an attempt to find a way in philosophy that does not have to be theoretical; an attempt begun in Nietzsche and culminated in Derrida.