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

The main question of this article is that what are the important differences or similarities between Aristotle's and Frege's analysis of the categorical proposition? Based on the famous view, Aristotle analyzes the categorical proposition into three components: Subject, Predicate and Relation; while Frege analyzes the categorical proposition into two components of Variable and Function, and therefore; these two analyses are completely different and there is no similarity between them. In the other article, I have argued that in the Aristotle's viewpoint, in the logical analysis of the categorical proposition, against its linguistic analysis, it is divided into two main components of subject and predicate. At this article, I have shown that by accepting of this analysis and based on it, it becomes clear that: firstly, there are important similarities between these two analyses: 1) both are two-part analyses 2) Aristotle, like Frege, considers «to be attributed to something else» to be the essential feature of the predicate part; Secondly, there are important differences between them: 1) Aristotle considers «to be attributed to something else» to be merely the essential property of the Role of Predicate, but Frege considers it to be also the essential property of general concepts that replaces in this role, and therefore 2) Frege, against Aristotle, maintains that general concepts cannot be the subject of propositions. This viewpoint of Frege is based on the «Fundamental distinction between Object and Concept». Therefore the root of the differences between the two analyses should be sought in this assertion..

Metaphysics or ontology is the most important stream of philosophy, or in other words, the whole stream of philosophy in history. Its two great representatives, Aristotle and Ibn Sina, each had a profound effect on the history of metaphysics. As the founder of metaphysics, Aristotle was able to master the whole course of Greek philosophy for the first time in history and to cover almost all subsequent metaphysical discussions. Therefore, the history of metaphysics must always be written about Aristotle from its beginning to its end. But Ibn Sina's philosophy, unlike Ibn Rushd's, is very different from Aristotle's. Thus, we can speak of two distinct ontologies that were studied in the history of metaphysics from the Middle Ages to Hegel, so that the work of Ibn Sina is more engraved on the history of metaphysics than Aristotle. The present study seeks to pave the way for a fundamental revision of the two philosophers' backgrounds in the re-reading of the history of philosophy, so that the different foundations of their philosophical views can be fully distinguished. The method in question is hermeneutic phenomenology, which seeks to find the foundation of thought in these two different metaphysical developments, although they develop on a single platform, which is metaphysics.