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

Based on the duality of "rationality" and "reasonableness," it has been argued that Rawls seeks objective moral beliefs; the objectivity Rawls seeks is a constructed objectivity. In the process of constructing objective beliefs, rational beliefs become reasonable beliefs. Reasonable beliefs are beliefs to which public justification has emerged; to achieve public justification, individual rational justifications are shared to be agreed upon by competent judges. Competent judges are equipped with a degree of rationality that can gain a reliable understanding of the beliefs of others and know the reasons for the crush and the rejection of a decision. These people are in a situation where they are unaware of the possible consequences of their decisions. Our chosen interpretation is an alternative to an intuitionist interpretation that considers objective moral judgments to be directly derived from moral intuition. In order to criticize intuitionist interpretation, in addition to making arguments in favor of constructivism, Rawls' criticisms of intuition have been formulated to strengthen the side of constructivism. For reasoning in favor of constructivism, logical order and order have been established between Rawls' specialized concepts, so that from one concept, another concept arises and this trend continues to achieve objective beliefs of constructivism; this objectivity has been obtained by competent arbitrators and hence called "civil objectivity".

A wisdom-based instructional design model was developed. This research-oriented model provides conditions for instructional designers to review and reconsider their assumptions, habits, and mental patterns in every educational design according to desirable learning dimensions. The goal is to create a learning model tailored to the specific situation and ideal conditions. The wisdom-based instructional design begins with the explanation and interpretation of the ideal human and continues with the elaboration of the realized human. Each stage is implemented using qualitative research methods, exploring sources that explain both the ideal and the realized human. The transformation of the realized human into the ideal human is then examined by comparing their characteristics, leading to a deduction of the changes needed to move from the realized human to the ideal one. Finally, the dimensions of wisdom-based instructional design are organized. In this study, the ideal human is defined as the wise human, and the elements of instructional design include the explanation and interpretation of wise learning dimensions (wisdom acquisition), the goals of wise learning, content production, the role and expertise of the teacher (wise practitioner) and student (wise learner), wise teaching methods (wisdom practice), and wise assessment and evaluation to achieve the wise human. This research represents the first attempt to design an educational model based on an indigenous approach, offering a novel perspective on learning dimensions. It diverges from all existing paradigms and approaches, as it is grounded in wisdom and supra-rationality, a fusion of mysticism and philosophical reasoning. The elements of instructional design are thus distinctly tailored to realize these unique learning dimensions.

The analysis of the relationship between reason and morality is as old as the history of thought, and philosophers from ancient Greece have always had a serious concern for evaluating this relationship. Taha Abd al-Rahman, an important Moroccan philosopher who is considered among the important thinkers of the Islamic world, is also trying to do something new by examining the concept of reason and morality and measuring the relationship between the two. In his thought, modern rationality is an element that is opposed to morality. To understand the nature of reason, he mentions three types of reason, whose analysis is necessary to understand the relationship between reason and morality. These three types of intellect are Abdur Rahman's innovative division, which can be considered as the basis of his moral system. In his opinion, the difference between humans and animals is morality, not reason . A rationality that is based on morality and constantly considers ethics as a supervisor and ruler has value, not that rationality that is alien to morality. In this article, after analyzing the two concepts of reason and morality in Abdul Rahman's thought, we will evaluate his approach regarding the relationship between reason and morality.

The present study aims to examine the role of rationality in the theories of philosophers and clarify the instances of harm and integrity within the context of enjoining good and forbidding evil from this perspective. This qualitative research was conducted using grounded theory with a comparative-analytical approach. The research domain encompassed all scientific documents related to philosophy and religion, where the views of philosophers on rationality and concepts associated with the religious duty of enjoining good and forbidding evil could be extracted. The data collection tools included note-taking related to the concepts of rationality and enjoining good and forbidding evil. In the first stage, relevant statements from texts addressing the main objective of the research were selected and coded. The concept of rationality was compiled from 43 codes derived from the views of 30 philosophers and thinkers. In the second stage, 350 selected codes were categorized under the headings "reason," "rational person," and "rational action." In the third stage, the selected categories of enjoining good and forbidding evil were studied and compared with the chosen codes from the second stage, and were classified based on their alignment or misalignment with the views of philosophers. Strauss and Corbin's proposed method was used for data analysis. The results showed that concepts related to enjoining good and forbidding evil, such as the sufficiency of rational judgment, issuing commands and prohibitions, the responsibility of governance, sense of responsibility, human duty, change and progress, religious obligation, the welfare of humanity, maintaining security, interaction between people and the government, governmental structure, and adherence to the law, were aligned with the views of philosophers and were deemed rational. Additionally, the concepts of enjoining good and forbidding evil were analyzed for harm within four categories: law, religion, politics, and progress. Reductionism, gender segregation, and granting privileges were identified as some of the harms.

The issue of the meaning of life and spirituality has been investigated in various fields of humanities; Because the meaning of life and spirituality is one of the most important issues of human life and nowadays it has been seriously considered by thinkers. Religious and modern spirituality, each with their own foundations and characteristics, give meaning to human life. Therefore, the problem of the present research is to examine the role of religious spirituality and modern spirituality in giving meaning to human life. The descriptive-analytical research method and information gathering has been done using library sources. The findings of the research indicate that religious spirituality, with its foundations and characteristics, draws a meaning of life that has a variety of individual and social functions. But modern spirituality, relying on foundations such as secularism, humanism, etc., has been satisfied with a minimal level of the meaning of life.

Contemporary man, who lives in the era of information and communication technology and is in a sense under the control of Cyberspace, is faced with issues that have made it difficult for him to distinguish truth from error. This difficulty has the same nature as the epistemological problems of ancient Greece, which were created by the Sophists and solved by Plato's enlightenment. The aim of the current research is to investigate whether Plato's position against the sophists can be a solution to the problems of Syber space? This research has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method and the findings indicate that although there is no absolute compatibility between the infrastructure and the content of the Cyberspace with the nature and practice of the sophist, and the basis and purpose of creating the Cyberspace is different from all kinds of sophistry which was done by the false claimants of philosophy; At the same time, in use, there is a significant closeness between these two procedures. Correspondence between sophistry and Cyberspace is clear in components such as the use of appearance instead of truth, opinion instead of knowledge, neglect of human knowledge, and the preference of speech or writing. The way out of the problems of Syberspace according to the Platonic approach is to pay attention to the two elements of "rationality" and "spirituality".

Faith is one of the basic concepts in the philosophy of religion, which forms the foundation of many new issues in contemporary religious epistemology. Untangling issues such as the relationship between faith and rationality is based on understanding faith and explaining its essential elements. Faith, both in religious and philosophical works, covers a range of different meanings from knowledge, belief, acceptance, feeling to trust and act, hence it has an ambiguous and challenging nature. This ambiguity in the quiddity of faith has also spread to secondary philosophical issues, so that some questions about the rationality of faith remain unsolved. It shows the necessity of reviewing the nature of faith and refining philosophical and religious theories. The present article with a critical-analytical approach aims to explain faith based on epistemological and non-epistemological components to show that faith has a multiple nature, and ignoring each of them leads to an incomplete and insufficient understanding of the meaning of faith. According to the results of the present research, faith is a reality made of knowledge and belief, arising from acknowledge and trust, medley of feeling and action, but has an independent nature and cannot be reduced to any of the mentioned components alone. Reductionism in the nature of faith causes the challenge of faith and rationality. In determining the main core of faith, if the epistemological components are the foundation of other components in such a way that the non-epistemological components are based on it, the right relation between faith and rationality is established.

The aim of the present research is to investigate the philosophical foundations of purposefulness and reason-oriented actions with legal consequences in the light of new findings of neuroscience, behavioral economics and contemporary philosophy of mind. In aim to identify these foundations, firstly, the concept of ultimate reason-oriented purpose in human behavior was analyzed from the perspective of philosophers (from ancient Greece till now) and contemporary neuroscientists. Then, the position of purposefulness and reason-oriented behavior with legal consequences has been investigated. The main question of the research is whether or not a human being performs all his voluntary actions (with an emphasis on legal actions) in a purposeful and reason-oriented way? The main hypothesis of the research is that human voluntary actions, including legal actions, are rationally oriented and due to the realization of a purpose. The findings of the research in the position of rejecting such hypothesis indicate that many voluntary human actions, including some actions with legal consequences, are emotional with limited rationality and the influence of environmental stimuli. Accordingly, there would not be judged by the example of a reasonable person with complete rationality in view law. The proposal of the research is to adopt an approach in which, besides the rational and ultimateistic aspects, the limited rationality of man in calculating and analyzing situations the emotional aspects and the nervous system, and the influence of environmental stimuli in the choice of decision, be paved and human beings never be judges through relying on rationality in all situations with an ideal standard. Especially in sudden events and lacking enough time that it is not possible for humans to process accurately and completely rational in calculating all kinds of possibilities and their consequences and referring to the reasons of their beliefs, preferences and information to choose the appropriate behavior.

In the present study, Mostafa Malekian's view on the compatibility of rationality and traditional religiosity is examined. Hence, first the definition of rationality and its types is expressed from his point of view, and then we explain two conceptions of religiosity from his viewpoint: traditional religiosity and critical religiosity. Next, we discuss the compatibility of rationality with either of these two religiosities. Realistically and pragmatically, Malekian finds rationality incompatible with traditional religiosity, but he proposes another kind of religiosity, which fits under "critical religiosity" and calls it "spirituality". In his view, rationality is not only compatible with spirituality, but essentially requires it. In Malekian's theory of "rationality and spirituality", only those theoretical teachings of the religious scriptures are accepted which either the intellect affirms definitively or have an epistemological preference, or although there is no epistemological preference for their own benefit or their opposite, their acceptance has beneficial consequences for the individual. Moreover, only that part of the practical religious teachings is practiced, which helps to reduce one's suffering.

The main purpose of this research is to critically study the narcissism and introversion of the spiritual man in the theory of "combination of rationality and spirituality". This method is descriptive-analytical through library and provincial studies. In this research, by emphasizing the foundations of Sadra's wisdom and the revealed teachings of Islam, these components (narcissism and introversion) are investigated. The most important criticisms on the components of introversion and narcissism are: the impossibility of presenting a spiritual model, forgetting the roles and structures in life, the alienation of a narcissistic spiritual person and spiritual selfishness. By accepting the foundations of the modern world, this theory enumerates certain characteristics for the path of spiritualism. "Narcissism" and "introversion" of a spiritual person are among these characteristics. In fact, these components are the consequence and necessity of the basis of "individualism" of spirituality. A spiritual man with his individuality seeks maximum introversion and self-expression due to narcissism. The result of the upcoming critical study is that these two components face a serious challenge to the theory of rationality and spirituality.

Frazer and Wittgenstein had a completely different approach to the nature of religion and rationality arising from science. In Frazer's view, scientific rationality is the standard of everything; therefore, he puts religion aside. The result of Frazer's comparison between magic, religion, and science leads to the denial of religious rationality. Frazer's anthropology is based on scientific and rational explanations. According to him, after centuries of displacement in history, science has finally obtained the golden key that opens the doors of nature's treasure. Wittgenstein criticizes Frazer's opinions based on his fundamental thinking about the meta-rationality of faith. He rejects any rational and scientific explanation of religion. According to Wittgenstein, the language game of religion and the language game of science differ. Frazer cannot compare the rationality of believers' religiosity with the criteria of rationality in science and sees and despises the believers as completely wrong. This study, by analyzing Frazer's and Wittgenstein's opinions and after examining the conflict, will reveal why Frazer's criticisms of scientific rationality failed and how Wittgenstein, using metaphors such as language games and the form of life, freed religious rationality from the trap of Frazer's narrow-minded scientific criteria.

Ignorance and dogmatism have always existed in various historical periods of epistemological disciplines and revealed their faces in their opposition to knowledge. Ignorance appears through separation from the necessities of knowledge. The spread of ignorance in the culture of social relationships threatens the place of scientific resources and epistemological cradles. Through breaking the idols of ignorance, Mullā Ṣadrā writes about the objective manifestations of such idols in society. He believes that the promotion of social relationships demands the creation of cradles for knowledge, and any kind of ignorance in this regard will result in the dominance of epistemological inefficiency. Through a semantic analysis of ignorance, Mullā Ṣadrā talks about one of its most obvious manifestations, which is dogmatism. He maintains that moral norms and epistemological necessities fade away in a dogmatism rooted in ignorance. The criticism of ignorance and reproach of ignorants in Mullā Ṣadrā’s portrayal of this phenomenon is manifested based on four elements: 1) lack of verification of mental understanding in conformity to reality, 2) lack of derivation of comparative elements particularly in the light of its functional dimensions such as unjust evaluation, 3) mental stagnation, and 4) defective social competition, which refers to the wrong quality of efficiency. When criticizing the culture of his time, Mullā Ṣadrā refers to the rise of ignorance behind the guise of knowledge as an important epistemological pest. In all his criticisms of this stagnant process, he introduces the weakness of true knowledge in society, spread of social foolishness, corruption of social justice, and frailty of the epistemological foundations of society as its most important outcomes. He propounds the treatment of ignorance in the light of a wise method of living while attending to its necessary elements.

The development of rational faculties that distinguish humans from other living beings is a topic of interest to scientists and philosophers from various perspectives. It is also a challenging topic in Foucault's intellectual and philosophical system. Therefore, this study examines the rationality in Foucault's thought using a descriptive-analytical method. In this context, relevant documents and sources related to postmodernism and Foucault's views were specifically selected and analyzed to achieve theoretical saturation. The research suggests that Foucault views rationality and knowledge as products of power. He criticizes partial, superficial, and local rationalities and instead focuses on comprehensive and universal rationality and truth. In addition, he views educational spaces, institutions, and organizations as reproductions and instruments of power. Based on this perspective, it can be said that, from Foucault's point of view, the ultimate goal of education is to cultivate critical, active, and creative students who can recognize power relations through deconstruction and analysis of texts and social practices and discover new meanings and interpretations.

This article aims to reassess the concepts of power, resistance, and subjectivity by examining the ideas of Hannah Arendt and Michel Foucault. At first glance, it seems that these two thinkers, rooted in different philosophical and theoretical foundations, are in opposition to each other, making a dialogue between their perspectives seemingly impossible. However, this article proposes an alternative approach by highlighting the common grounds and commonalities in their deconstruction of power. Moreover, it argues that their political views can be seen as aligned and complementary, leading to a deepening and development of each other's ideas and the creation of new political approaches. Thus, the central questions addressed in this article are: what forms of agency emerge for the contemporary subject as result of the deconstruction of power in thought of Arendt and Foucault? How does power act as a source of resistance while opening up new possibilities for the subject? The main finding of this study is that, in contrast to traditional and modern interpretations, power in the works of these thinkers is seen as a positive, creative, and productive concept. Based on this understanding, resistance and alternative forms of empowerment for the subject emerge. It should be noted, however, that Arendt’s and Foucault’s interpretation of resistance agency and power may differ due to the primacy of political and social issues in their respective theories.

The spiritualist theory of "rationality and spirituality" seeks to obtain inner satisfaction and peace of man. In this theory, Mr. Malekian mentions the "self-divinity" feature of the spiritual man by referring to the category of human modernization. This component is one of the essentials of the monotheistic (monistic) view of "God, man and nature". In this component, man, as the closest window to the consciousness of existence, has the most complete divinity and can experience his union with God and the world through his inner divinity. This research, with a descriptive-analytical method, through library studies, seeks to critically examine monism and the selfdivinity of spiritual man with regard to the foundations of transcendental wisdom and revelation teachings. Being influenced by Hindu mysticism, contrary to previously accepted principles, its conflict with Islamic mysticism (accepted by Malikians), confrontation of self-divinity with spiritual perfection, and its conflict with the goal of spiritualism are some of the most important criticisms of this attribute of spiritual man.

Practical intellect is the source of human actions. This power issues human action with the help of theoretical reason and by forging special rules and credentials related to action such as obligation. According to Allameh Tabatabai, the validity of obligation is the first and most important rule of practical reason in order to issue a definite verb. Credit obligation in relation to some verbs may be absolute and in relation to other verbs. The more this application is, the less disturbing the issuance of the verb will be, but the obligatory obligation will cause the verb to be issued only in certain circumstances. The problem of doubt in practical rationality is explained by the application and restriction on the necessity of the action. Higher application in obligation means more intensity and more restraint means less intensity in issuing the verb. The root of this application and restriction also goes back to the attention of the soul. This application and restriction may be formed around the actions of each of the forces that play a role in the issuance of the verb, the most important of which are Theoretical intellect ,illusion, anger and lust, because the practical intellect in the necessity and issuance of any verb is influenced by one of these forces. The passivity of the practical intellect against the lower powers causes the necessity of a gentle action to be issued with that power with more application and less restraint (less disturbance). The lowest degree of rationality is rationality bound by lust, and practical rationality focused on anger, delusion, and theoretical reason are ranked higher, respectively.

The view of each of the important humanistic schools on the category of "human dignity" is considered one of the important and basic theoretical foundations of those schools and remains in a fluid spirit that is current in each and every belief of these schools. The purpose of writing this research is to explain the criteria of human value. In the world, from the point of view of Islam, it is against the idea of ​​humanism. This article, using library data and documents in a descriptive-analytical method, categorizes the verses of the Qur'an and the hadiths of the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) about human dignity and its origin and requirements. The findings of the research show that in the attitude derived from the Qur'an and hadiths, man has a natural (formative) dignity that is related to the type of humanity, and he can also realize his existential talents in the path of truth, from the value (acquired) dignity ) to benefit. As long as the title of human being with the components of natural dignity such as soul, reason and free will is true for man, he will have natural, natural and social rights.

Philosophical proponents of the idea of progress believe that the human condition has improved throughout history and to this day, and will continue to do so in the future. Adorno writes in his writings that man has not progressed to date, but there is a possibility of progress in the future. Adorno's position thus becomes that he is not opposed to the idea of progress, but to the claim that progress has been made in the history of mankind. Our claim in this article is that according to the Dialectic of the Enlightenment, it is not just the catastrophes of the twentieth century that Adorno's reason for not making progress in human history, but he believes in the dialectical rule of rationality and domination of human history. If we accept this claim, then it must be said that such an idea eliminates even the possibility of progress in the future, and therefore there is a contradiction between the dialectic of the Enlightenment and the idea of progress.