فصلنامه آینه معرفت
پیاپی 57 (زمستان 1397)

There are different opinions about the Primal Matter among slamic philosophers. On the types and numbers of substances have been presented various views. One of the reasons for this disagreement is that some put Primal Matter among substances And others do not this. People like Abu al-Barakat Baghdadi and Sheikh Ishraq and at the present time , People like Motahari and Mesbah consider it to be rejected. although Sadr al-Motaalehin Shirazi explains in detail about Primal Matter and it is famous that he accepts it but by summing up his particular views on Primal Matter such as the non-existence of Primal Matter and inteligible and non-causality for it in relation to Form and abstraction Primal Matter of form and … As well as according to the principles such as the primacy of existence ,existential gradation and of the Division of self-subsistent existence and connective being, It can be seen that in terms of Mulla Sadra Primal Matter is secondary intelligible.

Although "Determinism and free will" in its quiddity is a Theology issue, it has also led to mysticism for two reasons: the Theology background of the mystics and the necessity of some mystical teachings. The pursuit of this Theology discussion in the Islamic mysticism has led to a wider range of depth and more frequent discussions on allegations and issues of monotheism and the adventures of the mystics due to the accuracy of the opinions and points of the mystics. But the citation from some of the fiddlies words of Theology and the lack of systematic attention to the comprehensive message of the mystics has caused some doubtful determinism of the mystics to some. This paper, based on the tricks of the words of the mystics, elucidates three important issues of Determinism that have only purely mystical and not Theology origins, and, in the right way, in the path of accountability and elimination of doubts and misunderstandings, and ultimately, confirming the kind of free will, Of course, with a mystical approach. These three axes are: the grace of God in the realms of possibility; the manifestation and rule of the names of the divine, the fixed beings.

Philosophy of jurisprudence is a branch of additional philosophy in which jurisprudence as the science of legal laws is analyzed and described via detailed reasoning from an outer viewpoint and with an approach of second-degree knowledge. Theoretical analysis of jurisprudence as a science that has come true through the culture, history and civilization of Islam leads to a general theory about it. The general theory in the field of jurisprudence, regardless of the sect, subject and specific era, is called philosophy of jurisprudence. The quiddity of jurisprudent is explained and jurisprudential propositions are described in the philosophy of jurisprudence. The efficiency of the logic of jurisprudence is assessed from the methodological viewpoint that leads to the base of jurisprudence. The validity of the sources and reasons containing the legal law are also assessed. The relation and connection between jurisprudence and other sciences are presented and the way a jurist, in producing jurisprudential teachings, gets influenced by human and experimental sciences gets explained. Each of the abovementioned topics and other ones contains an important problem in the field of philosophy of jurisprudence. Debating the problems of philosophy of jurisprudence leads to a general and comprehensive view on jurisprudence in a way that affects the intra-jurisprudential studies of the jurist.

Hope is one of the most humane phenomena. Among the late philosophers, in particular with the analytic approach, there is a lot of effort to critique the traditional definition of hope. The approach to believing in it is sufficient or inadequate in the definition of hope, as well as the criterion of validity, or the so-called rationality of hope, is the main theme of these discussions. In this article, while briefly reviewing these definitions, we analyze the three main types of rationality of hope: rationality Epistemological, practical rationality and fundamental rationality / identity. After discussing the three types of rationality of hope and analyzing their ratio, it is suggested that the phenomenon of hope, according to its futuristic emotional nature, is assessed more with the criterion of minimalistic rationality. So radical and maximal rationality. The final section of the paper deals with the ethics debate. But for the sake of observing the accuracy of the discussion, among the various issues, the ethical analysis focuses on three implicit hopes of hope: disappointment, dreams, and political exploitation of the hopeful. In addition, inspired by Gabriel Marcel's breakdown, hopes of hoping for a breakdown and practical benefits in the ethics of hope are mentioned.

Some contemporary epistemologists claim that there are two different kinds of epistemic defeat that are respectively called evidence undermining and judgment undermining. Using a thesis called two streams of justification thesis, they argue that in the first case one's justification is completely undermined while in the second case, despite the fact that one loses some part of her justification, she is justified to believe in P to some degree. In this paper, after focusing on the argument proposed in Rotondo's (2013) (as an instance of this camp of epistemologists), I show that different articulations of the thesis should be distinguished. I call them the first articulation and the second one and then I show that the second articulation is more plausible. Then I introduce a specific formulation of the evidentialism thesis and argue that despite its own problem, it has an advantage over the second articulation. I introduce my preferred justificatory thesis to rectify the problem at the end. The preferred justificatory thesis determines the necessary and the sufficient conditions for a person to be justified in believing a proposition. Accepting the preferred justificatory thesis is equal to rejecting Rotondo's claim.