A Critical Analysis of the Subject of Science and Its Necessity According to Ᾱkhund al-Khurasānī

For a long time, there has been a debate among experts and thinkers about whether or not a branch of science should have a subject. Legal theorists (Uṣūlī), like logicians and philosophers, have expressed their thoughts in this field. The late Ᾱkhund al-Khurasānī is one of the great scholars of science who has given his opinion taking the issue of having any scientific discipline as an evident and indisputable matter. According to what has been attributed to him, he has used the "Axiom of the One Effect" (qāʿida al-wāḥid maʿlūlī) as a proof of his claim. An examination of other experts' opinions also points to the two reasons, namely "the distinction of sciences" and "division of sciences into real and mentallyposited" (iʿtibārī) along with the "Axiom of the One Effect" as the evidence for the necessity of each science having a subject. The late Ᾱkhund al-Khurasānī not only maintains that every science should have a subject but he also says that the subject should be single and allencompassing. All three reasons can be criticized. According to the author, subject refers to a certain matter and it does not mean that subject should be single and encompassing. In other words, it is not necessary that the subject-matters of the issues be essentially united with each other or that they should form a single entity. It is enough to have a form of relationship. In other words, there need to be an abstract common axis with which the issues are related.