نشریه فلسفه تحلیلی
پیاپی 14 (پاییز و زمستان 1387)

What is the difference of physical concepts in physicians’ usage and inordinary people’s one? One possible answer could be that inphysicians’ usage of physical concepts every concept is its operationalmeasurement. But, for every concept there are different operationalmeasurements. Which one has to be proffered? The defenders ofoperationalism tell us that there is not a priori criterion for thisjudgment. In this article, after interdicting Bridgman’s operationalismsome of its advantages and disadvantages will be discussed.

Recently feminist epistemology became a specific domain and in whichare privileged certain research programs and some various orientationsin them. M. Alcoff is a feminist epistemologist who has focused oncontinental philosophy, feminism, politics, race-theory, and sexuality.Considering relation between knowledge and its historical-socialcontext is special remark of her works and researches. In many of herwritings, specially, Real Knowing, she maintains, in contrast withpoststructuralists and pragmatists, that “truth” is a concept nonseparableof, referential to, and dependent on content. She also arguesfor “normative subjectivity” as a fundamental, context-dependent, andnon-universal, idea. Completion of an ontological, coherent account oftruth-theory is her ambitious claim. Phenomenology and hermeneuticsmake up her philosophic method for that ambition and her critique oftraditional issues as well. It seems to her that phenomenology let us tosee how every idea relates to some experience and hermeneuticsteaches us to consider the influence of historical-cultural context incomprehending it.

Reason (knowledge) and will are two of more significance God’sattribute. The philosophical problem rises here is that which one haspriority in the creation of the world. A few philosopher and theologianproclaim that the reason (knowledge) has priority to will. Amongwestern philosopher, Schaupenhauer, is one of the most famous onewho explicitly give priority to will, this study attempts to compare andconformity of Schopenhauer view for voluntary with Islamic scholarsoutlooks and finding out also its similarity and differences. Ibn’sina, onthe contrary, argues that the nature of power and/or will is knowledge;Gazzali, on the other hand, maintains approximately, asSchaupenhauer that will has priority.

The disagreements between Mulla Sadra and Ibn-Sina concerning theissue of the union of the intellect and the intelligible represent anexample of the difference between the conceptions of two prominentislamic philosophers of an important philosophical problem.Two completely contrasting theories have been ascribed to Ibn-Sina inthis regard. Some of his words indicate his rejection of the union of theintellect and the intelligible. While some of his other words indicate hisconfirmation of this theory. Conversely, Mulla Sadra is a greatsupporter of this theory and has adduced various arguments todemonstrate it. The theory of the union of the intellect and theintelligible, which is either denied or accepted by Ibn-Sina, is not inharmony with the one supported by Mulla Sadra, and the views of thesetwo philosophers concerning this theory are totally different from eachother. Their disagreements can be summarized in two points:1. Reality of intellection 2. Reality of the unionConsidering the above two points of difference, we can say that theirconceptions of the union of the intellect and the intelligible are sodifferent from each other that they represent the intellectualconfrontation between them deeper than what it really is.

Darwin’s view on science was different from his inductivistcontemporaries. After a glimpse to this difference, in section one hisfirst three geological hypotheses will be refered. We could see therethat how did he understand that analoy cannot provide any proof for atheory. Section two is devoted to Darwin’s argument(s) in the origin ofspecies. We find there that his scientific method is in accordance withcritical rationalism.

Certain method of demonstrating theological and exegetical claims isone of the heritages of Mutazilite Muslim theologians. One of the maincharacteristics of this method is that there is a considerable attention toreason as the permission to use rhetorician figures like metaphor andallegoric exegesis in describing theological doctrines as well as ininterpreting of the Quran. Assuming that using this method was notconfined to Muslim Mutazilite theologians and, before and after them,some of the Jewish Christian theologians have used this method, thepaper focusing on the divine attributes and relying on some instances ofthe interpretations of the Bible, will try to show that Saadia Gaon, aJewish theologian (d. 942), had a method similar to that of MuslimMutazilte theologians and, therefore, it might be called him "MutaziliteJew". Using a method like Mutazilite theologians, he interpretedintricate concepts in the Old Testament by concentrating on rhetoricalaspects of the text, and defended Jewish theology against the objectionsfrom his theological opponents, that is Christians.

Walter Benjamin (1892-1940) was philosopher and cultural and literarycritic. In 1936, he wrote the essay titled "The Work of Art in the Age ofits Mechanical Reproduction". This essay has had a profound influenceon the approaches to art. His main concern was the change in thenature of the art in virtue of its technical reproducibility. Massreproducibility transformed both of the art reception and the impact ofartworks. The change in the impact of artworks on the audiences is dueto the substitution of the ritual function with exhibitional function.Benjamin believes that, which disappears in the age of mechanicalreproduction is the "aura" of the artwork. Mechanical reproduction inphotography and film has completed this process in which the auraslowly disappears. He maintains that, this new experience alters theconcept of art itself and recoils the function in favor of political andsocial behaviors; to say exactly, social function of art has changed fromritual to political one. He believed that, there is a hidden force inreproductive artwork in present age which can function againsttradition.