نشریه حکمت سینوی
پیاپی 51 (بهار و تابستان 1393)

By excluding the general proposition about action from the realm of practical reason Ibnsina specifies a special place for this faculty. Sheikh statement about the moving and perceiving characteristic of practical reason has been critisiced as being in consistent. In this paper it is shown that despite Sheikh emphasis on moving characteristic of practical reason the triple relations which he attributes to the relation of practical reason with the body, theoritical reason and celestial souls requires some kind of perception for practical reason. This faculty in relation to theoritical reason acquires the rational universals and makes use of them in its practical deductions. In its relation with the body it uses the individual perception of the imaginative faculty and in its attachment to the celestial souls intuites the individual truths. But practical reason has no perception in the sense of direct attachment to the active intellect and cannot receive the general truths. For this reason Sheikh does not consider the meaning of perception and intellection in the practical reason to be indentical and regards the application of the name intellect to these two as being literal communality and lays stress on the moving character of practical reason.

Gödel proves the contingency of Cantor’s generalized continuum hypothesis through the proof of non-impossibility; on the other hand, according to Avicenna’s claim in the previous section to the last of al-Isharat, not having proof of impossibility suffices for contingency (imkan). Now, the question is whether Gödel’s effort is superfluous or Avicenna’s claim is false. My answer is a third option: neither the former nor the latter. The “contingency” (imkan) in the Avicenna’s claim means “probability” which is mental and subjective; so, it does not need anything but "not having proof of impossibility". But, the contingency of the generalized continuum hypothesis is external and objective; therefore, it does need the proof of non-impossibility. Consequentely, neither Gödel’s effort is superfluous, nor Avicenna’s claim is false.

The method of Islamic Philosophers in interpreting the revealed and religious texts has always been confronted by the opposition of literalists. Ibn Sina considers all knowledge, in clouding rational and revealed knowledge. As an emanation from Active Intellect and in this way he regards the revealed and rational knowledge as being of the same kind. He holds that a saye who by the aid of intellect discovers the orders of existence he also finds out the meanings of verses and can detect the symbolical and allegorical verses of Quranic verses by his own intellect. By contrast, Ghazali by his emphasis on the preservation of appearance, precluded the people from any kind of commentary and justified the path for the adherents of the ancients and explained it away.But he too after turning to mysticism proffered the inner way and has taken the same way in commentary by which he condemned Ibn ina. By comparing the commentary of Ibn Sina and Ghazali on the verse "Nor" the similarity and equality of them in the principles interpretation despite some small differences becomes clearer. This change of Ghazuli's position is a witness to this fact that belief in the order of existence and other principles cannot fit to gather with literalism and these principles lead to the same interpretive method. Therefore by keeping to the way of moderation, the correct path of interpretation and commentary on this basis can be ached.

The method of critical thinking is one of the active and new methods in teaching philosophical thinking.This method is one of innovations of Matthew Lipman and Robert Ennis which is based on some principles. These principles are thinking curiosity, objectivism, flexibility, extensionality of thinking, rational skepticism and being methodical. In this article an important question is that " How much have the Islamic philosophers especially Ibn Sina as a propagators of philosophical thinking, used the method of critical thinking in the path of propagation of philosophy and development of philosophical thinking? After studying and considering the works of Avicenna and his practical method it has become clear that he has used the method of critical thinking in many situations such as criticism and analysis of the thoughts of common and elite people, in the manner of encounter with his contemporary critics, in his scientific relations to his disciples, in consolidation and propagation of logical thinking (demonstrational thinking) in philosophy.

In some cases, Avicenna used the semantical premises in order to deduce some conclusions in his Physics. For instance, he analyzes five derivatives of the word “tabiat” (nature) and then in the light of these analyses, he concludes that the natural properties of an object are caused by its essence and are based on it. Here, the major problem is how to justify Avicenna's passage from semantical premises to physical consequents. This paper shows that through analyzing the relation between nature and its derivatives, on one hand, and explicating Avicenna’s definition of the “nature” on the other hand, we can defend the rationality of such a passage.

Avicenna has provided valuable researches in psychology which are the basis of his recognition of diseases and treatment. This that human is a combination of the soul and body, the soul has several forces, the connection between soul and body, the superiority of man's nature and closeness to the true balance, are examples of Avicenna's philosophical researches about soul of which he used in the medicine. This approach shows that Avicenna did not consider medicine independent of philosophy and had used philosophical matters in the medicine as axioms. One of the questions which has engaged the researchers and physicians is to investigate how the effect of Avicenna's philosophical view on his medicine is. Since that one of the advantages of Avicenna's medicine is considering the spiritual aspects in addition to the physical ones, so the presence of Avicenna's psychology can be observed in all stages of treatment and therefore his medicine can be considered as a comprehensive medicine which covers all aspects of human existence.

Goal is regarded as one of the main components of educational programs. With education defined as human transition and return from his existing condition to the desired one, such transition necessitates an awareness of the goal/goals behind this movement determining its direction, path and end. In addition to discussing issues on self-recognition, Avicenna has attempted to consider human education establishing human real prosperity as the main goal of his evolutionary movement. On the way to reaching the main goal, he has established some intermediate aims involving theological, ethical, scientific-educational, cultural-artistic, social, environmental-physical and political-economic ones.