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

Philosophy of rights as one of the branches of philosophy is a new discipline dealing with a real phenomenon called “right” and the related issues including the conceptual content, existential structure, various types of rights and the right-holders. The study method in this branch of philosophy is making use of rational study regarding the universal precepts of right. “Genetic right” is one of the most important types of right whose holders, include all beings. In the present article, we have investigated the “right” from the viewpoint of the principles of transcendental philosophy from different aspects including the analysis of conceptual structure, existential structure, and the relationship with existence to clarify that the right is equal to the existence. To clarify the main structure of the discussion, we have then dealt with the nature of genetic right and mentioned its existential orders and features, such as concomitance with existence, to fix the status of genetic right as one of the essential accidents of existence to be discussed in philosophy.

In Aristotle’s Contributions to Logic, the modal syllogistic has a special place and has been controversial from antiquity to the present. One of the most discussed problems of modal syllogistic is the result of a syllogism composed of an absolute minor and a necessary major. Meanwhile, Aristotle has regarded the result necessary, some of his successors have refuted this conclusion. A recent study to defend the consistency of Aristotle’s modal theory as a whole shows that the proposed counterexamples are not acceptable, referring to the theory of predicable in Topics. Focusing on Avicenna’s work, this study shows that in the logic of Islamic tradition, appealing to the distinction between essential (dhati) and description (wasfi) necessity, another solution has been proposed to this difficulty. A solution that can be used to explain the relation between the Book of Syllogism and the Book of Demonstration. Also, it would solve the ambiguity prevailing in Aristotle’s thoughts.

Spinoza, one of the major rationalist philosophers following Descartes in the seventeenth century,has commented on God. He tries to resolve dualism arising from Descarte's thoughtsin a philosophicalmanner and for the same reason, contrary to Descartes who believed in three types of substances, heaccepted the existence of only one substance in the world and identified it withGod.This is the substance the existence of whichdoes not depend onthe existence of other things; nor does its conception depend onthe conception ofother things. In fact, according to Spinoza, the substance is “self-caused”, “absolutelyinfinite” and “self-existent”and the actual existence belongs to itand other creatures depend on it for their existence. In Espinosa’s view,such a being exists by necessity.In this paper, an attempt has been made to analyze the implications of “substance”, “being self-caused”, “absolute infinity”, “self-existence” and“the necessityof existence for God” from Spinozasperspective and philosophically explicatehow “necessityof existence” is associated with God.

One of the most problems in Kalam, philosophy and theoretical mysticism lies in God`s purity of quiddity. The problem has been established upon precise reasonable principles. This reasonable rule is of considerable affect in understanding some Quranic verses. Theologians, however, have opposed the rule. It can be said that the main cause for their opposition lies in their misunderstanding of the meaning of existence. The method of study in the paper is logico-analytical, the one appropriate for philosophical problems. Reflecting on the bases and logical structure of the claims and their ends is the main instrument for the study.