نشریه فلسفه
سال چهلم شماره 1 (بهار و تابستان 1391)

Against the metaphysics of presence، which he describes it by the concept of phonocentrism and thinks transcendental philosophies and structuralism as two fundamental types of it، Derrida introduces “différance”. So they would be the best start points to arrive it، and Derrida appeals frequently to Husserl and Saussure in his works. Différance goes beyond the opposition of presence and simple absence (absence of presence)، it goes beyond every presence (now presence and delayed presence) by rejecting transcendental signified. By turning to phonocentrism and structuralism، we will try to put différance in this manner. We want to clarify the reason of selecting such an apparently paradoxical discourse by Derrida، and the way différance goes beyond metaphysical oppositions.

Analytic philosophy begins from language. Because niversality and comunity character of language، or its intersubjectivity character، that philosophy doesn''t search to answer to problem as Solipsism، another individual and etc.; contrary، phenomenology is faced that problems and must answers to them. Husserl''s phenomenology always has been accused solipsism and wittgenstein tries to criticize solipsism، and therefore he tries to shows paralysis of phenomenology. He denies private language and experience to indicate meaning of word is in its use. This article rejects solipsism accusation of phenomenology and will indicate that is impossible which we deny private experience. The article sees its duty to indicates that language be based in phenomenology، and its foundation is intuition of things. This point of viwe will be proved، The first by criticizes of view of Dscartes، namely، it is reject pure and empty subjectivity،the second، explain intentionality as correlate of pure subjectivity flow with systematic discipline of its objects as intuition life word. Then the correlation pictures that we must characterize the language as systems and fields that they are given in intuition by refelaction and think on intiuition، than the reflations and thinks modilication، and through language expressions is refered to thinges. Therefore the language and its refers is derivative and fictious. The article pictures that «object is object of a play،» and a play must is explained the through intuition or phenomenology، or there ia a parallel between language plays and possible worlds.

In the tradition of philosophy Prime matter has been often accepted as a genuine Aristotelian concept. However، this has been doubted by some modern scholars. The dispute is mainly whether Aristotle committed to prime matter or not. On the other hand، some scholars still endorse prime matter as a part of Aristotle’s philosophy. Prime matter is tied up to the problem of generation. Generation، in a sense is “absolute becoming”، i. e. not “becoming something”، whereas the general analysis of change indicates that in all becoming something remains. It is on this aporia that prime matter plays its role. Prime matter seems to be able to solve the difficulty and we can maintain both that generation is absolute becoming and that something remains in the course of generation. Moreover the replacement of one element with another one can’t be explained without prime matter، because there is nothing prior to the elements i. e. to water، air، fire and earth، to be as the secondary matter. In this article، explaining the relation between matter and form، I have tried to clarify the meaning of “matter remaining” in the course of generation، and “combination of matter and form” in sensible substances. In this analysis، the concept of “potentiality” has a central role. When potentiality actualizes، then there is no potentiality، although this present actuality is the actualization of that potentiality. In the same manner، when we say a matter gets a new form، it means that the matter which was an indeterminate thing becomes form and determinate. Accordingly، the combination of matter and form means that each material substance happens “from” a certain subject and reaches an end، and the matter remaining means that this certain matter، and not any other one، has changed into the form، but it doesn’t mean something endures in the course of the process of generation. If this interpretation of remaining and combination is accepted، there will be no room for prime matter.

The most important aim of tis paper is explanation kant''s attitude as transcendental self. It has no resemblance to substantial subject emprisist and rationalist systems. Kant''s subject remains always subject and has no objectical face. So self-conseciousness is awarness to subjective aspect of object. That means a composition of representations in base of apriori notions subject. Transcendental «I»، in his opinion، is exactly a bare simple notion and a basis formal =X. This subject (Self) in entire act of composition of meanings، representations، has numerical identity. So We aware of it through of its apriori notions. However، The best interpretation of «I» in kant''s is unity of apperception. That is the act of the composition of epistemic contents with aid of apriori notions. So real Self، is unity and persist and identity of this transcendental act.

In his attempt to investigate how communication، understanding and interpretation develop، Donald Davidson appeals to the so-called “principle of charity” anduses it across the board. This principle in fact is a set of different and interrelated principles and consists in three bases: consistency، correspondence and agreement. In this paper، reviewing function، position and different aspects of this principle in philosophy of Donald Davidson، I will try to show that he takes this principle as the set of necessary conditions for possibility of understanding and interpretation.

In his attempt to investigate how communication، understanding and interpretation develop، Donald Davidson appeals to the so-called “principle of charity” anduses it across the board. This principle in fact is a set of different and interrelated principles and consists in three bases: consistency، correspondence and agreement. In this paper، reviewing function، position and different aspects of this principle in philosophy of Donald Davidson، I will try to show that he takes this principle as the set of necessary conditions for possibility of understanding and interpretation.

Defense of the ethical interpretation of Aristotle’s katharsis. One of the important genres in theatre and key topics in Aristotle’s Poietike is tragedy. In Aristotle’s point of view، the different varieties of poems are viewed as artifact matters which are the product of human mimesis. Amongst these، the tragic poem has its own superior position، not only regarding face & form، but also regarding its content. This is because it is able to create katharsis by provoking the feeling of pity & fear in its audience. Many different interpretations of katharsis have been developed، including a psychological، epistemological، ethical & medical interpretations; nevertheless، it is indisputable that ethical end has a higher status than the rest. This article aims at showing that the genre of tragedy can be viewed as an important factor in adoring the human soul with virtues by creating a moderation in it (the soul). This in turn is the grounds for bringing about prosperity and fortune، which are known as Aristotle’s ultimate end. Trough this interpretation، the firm (trustworthy) connection of art & ethics in Aristotle’s point of view become clear.