The Philosophy of Application of Philosophical Rules in Principles of Jurisprudence

The relationship between philosophy and Principles of Jurisprudence is examined in two main areas: First, the logical relationship between philosophy and Principles of Jurisprudence; Second, the historical and existing relationship between philosophy and Ilm al-Usul. The former constitutes the logical and epistemic foundation of the latter. When it comes to the validity and correctness of applying philosophical rules in the Principles of Jurisprudence, there are two major opinions: First, there is no logical relationship between philosophy and Ilm al-Usul. This opinion is held by Mohaqqiq Isfahani and favored by Allamah Tabatabai, Imam Khomeini and Shahid Mutahhari. After these scholars, the claim that the truth and consideration (e’tibar) are mixed up and confused in the arguments presented in Ilm al-Usul, gained credit and momentum. The second opinion is that there is a relationship between philosophy and Ilm al-Usul. The most important reason given by the proponents of the first opinion is that actual and real perceptions are mixed with those which are mentally-posited. According to the writer, the second opinion is solid and defendable and that the following arguments have been presented to substantiate it: First, the binding rules known as Ahkam-e Taklifi (defining rules) are not mentally posited; second, the discussions taking place in Ilm al-Usul are analytical; third, the actuality enjoys the support of Ilm al-Usul. Additionally, the argument put forth by proponents of the first opinion is insufficient and that it is applied to varying mentally-posited concepts.