نشریه متافیزیک
سال نهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 24، پاییز و زمستان 1396)

Henri Louis Bergson's book, "The two sources of morality and religion" shows that there are two sources for ethics and religion which in turn AkhlaqVdynVjvd two types: 1-ethics package that religion is related to the "static" moral Ast2 Dean opened the "dynamic" package Ast.akhlaq static religion and ethics related to social cohesion and development associated with creativity Dard.akhlaq opened opened a dynamic religion of peace Vhdfsh Vsfast.srchshmh ethics Vfragyr is open to "creative emotions," the Namd.ama ethics Knd.dyn static and dynamic religion with Vhmnshyn VhmnshynQlAst but Vthvl creative intuition. creative evolution dynamic between religion and ethics agreement between mysticism and morality and how to open car in the modern era is the focus of this article. Bergson argues that if religion is merely a response in the face of danger and at risk and in the event that there is no danger arises why religion still remain? Many of those who are in the field of psychology of religion and the opinion of the author have tried to offer psychological explanations of religion.

the role of the "Critique of Judgment" in the explanation of empirical causality in the transcendental idealism of Kant, could be considered from two aspect. first is the explanation of meaning of experiential causality in the "Critique of Pure Reason", and another is the explanation of relation between a priori law of experiential causality and a-posteriori laws of experiential causality. Kant in the "Critique of Judgment", with assertion on distinction between a priori, constitutive, and absolutely necessary principle of causation and a-posteriori, unnecessary, and experiential causality laws, tries to fill the gap between the two classes of laws by a priori and regulative principle and of purposiveness that mechainism and organism(teleology) are it's applications and so completes his explanation about his transcendental idealism about experiential causality.Kant in the "Critique of Judgment", with assertion on distinction between a priori, constitutive, and absolutely necessary principle of causation and a-posteriori, unnecessary, and experiential causality laws, tries to fill the gap between the two classes of laws by a priori and regulative principle and of purposiveness that mechainism and organism(teleology) are it's applications and so completes his explanation about his transcendental idealism about experiential causality.

Secondary philosophical intelligibles are general philosophical concepts such as existence, non-existence, cause, effect and accident on which the life of Islamic philosophy depends. Muhammad Husayn TabatabaI has tried to propose a comprehensive theory about the way through which secondary philosophical intelligibles are originated. He believes that these intelligibles are first understood through relational concepts and then non-relational concepts are abstracted from those relational ones and generalized. This article tries to give a clear formulation of the theory with four phases (in addition to its foundations) using Tabatabai's works and Motahhari's comments. The resuts of this research study shows that these concepts are not delusion. It also depicts that these concepts are not extracted from internal or external experiences or primordial human nature (fitrah) but are created from perceptive faculty. In addition, some other key issues to which Allameh has not paid enough attention, such as how to generalize the concept of secondary intelligible which has been abstracted from a special mental state to the whole world and the relationship between secondary intelligible obtained in the mind and the object to which the secondary intelligible refers, have been stated and the researcher has tried to find answers for these questions.

A new pluralism wants to have formidability and in what sense and on what foundations should be? These questions might be posited due to the decline of religious beliefs and sacraments, the realization of subjectivity and on the other hand, the increasing process of new spirituality and the prosperity of individual interpretations of spirituality in West. According to author's view, pluralism which is used as "spiritual pluralism" is an insight into the truthiness of a variety of spiritual readings that people have achieved through their own inner experiences and consider as a spiritual truth. There are two assumptions in the context of this theory. First, the spiritual reality is individual that needs no outside and organizational justification. Second, to achieve such fact, we must suspend all preceding beliefs and try to acquire the exclusive action by introspection and self-knowledge about outer lives. Spiritual pluralism, based on Krishnamurti's view, on these two assumptions and attending to new spiritual conditions reflects two facts: First, it confirms any personal claim about spiritual truth because the truth of the spirituality appears through individuality of the person. Second, it grows different spiritual readings because it is the necessity of adopting such an approach (in the first point).

Avicenna and the Role of Metaphysics in the Religious Hermeneutics is an interdisciplinary study that relates metaphysics¡ hermeneutics and religious texts (Quran and Sunnah) to each other. This article deals with the examination of the role of metaphysics in the understanding of Quran and Sunnah and the problems related to them. This study is fundamental¡ historical and analytical which is a library based research based on reliable sources. The results shows that in Avicenna’s view the best understanding of hermeneutics and religious texts (Quran and Sunnah) is done by the interpreter. He believes that this is the interpreter who uses his presuppositions to understand the views of the author or the religious texts. In this article¡ we are going to identify the metaphysical assumptions of Avicenna to understand the issues related to the knowledge of origin and return¡ cosmology¡ eschatology¡ and prophetology. By understanding these presuppositions, he has gained results that do not concur with a superficial view of religion.

The present article attempts to analyze and compare the views of Charles Darwin and Michel Foucault from an ontological point of view, claiming that there are serious ontological common grounds between the two. At first glance, such a comparison seems to be a bit odd and somehow impossible. The oddity of such a comparison is due to the point that, on the one hand, Michel Foucault is deemed as one of the vanguards of postmodern movement and as a result emphasizes and is associated with concepts such as relativism; on the other hand, the Darwinian viewpoint, or simply Darwinism, as a biological theory is more concerned and associated with "objectivism," as opposed to "relativism." In contrast to the views of many Darwinists and postmodern Foucauldian thinkers, the researcher attempts to, through an ontological study, demonstrate that the Darwinian and Foucauldian viewpoints share common ontological bases, namely, materialism and positivism.