نشریه شناخت
سال پنجم شماره 2 (پیاپی 67، پاییز و زمستان 1391)

According to Aquinas, cognition is acquired by species. There is a kind of likeness the cognized object within the one cognizing. It is a formal identity to cognitive powers and external objects. In addition, the content of cognition is determined by species. But to cognize a particular, a represented form is not enough, as Aquinas, there would be a form of material somehow in agent to individualize it. If intellectual power can apprehend the form which made by itself, it do not claim to a realistic cognition of world. According to commentators, intelligible species is not the proper object for intellect, but through them it can apprehend the universal nature existing in the individual. So it can be inferred that the intellect abstract the universal nature by considering to individual form of phantasms and considering is apprehending.

War as a phenomen related to the will to overcoming, is based on the Nietzsche’s axial thinking principle, “the will to power”. Overcoming manners, denotate the being of many types of war in various domains of life. In the domain of art, the overcoming manners, is devided to two status: 1) the status of creation of art-work that denotated with overcoming the art-work’s matter and imposing the perfection on that. 2) the status of art-work’s cultural function that denotats the arise of the wettkampf and attracts to participate in the war-field.

Plato’s philosophical activities lasted for fifty years. Obviously stream of human thought is constantly modified by the change of life conditions, and if it is supposed that the outcome of this evolution is to be discerned in a 50-year performance, a change of approaches and diversity of perspectives should not escape from the thorough exploration of the keen researcher. The chronological classification of Plato's works helps us with the better comprehension of the concepts and philosophical theories provided in his philosophy. There is a common belief that Plato who first just tried to sketch the Socrates’ legacy of virtue in his demise, in second optimistically started to confess his own verdict regarding value and knowledge, and in third reconsidered his own initial opinions in the way which Socrates’ lead role disappear in his works. In this paper by presenting tacitly the three different periods, we will, in short, note belonging of each work to its own period. We find then Cratylus the most problematic work in this regard. In order to solve its problem, we recourse to some historical, textual cites and equalities, and some logical arguments based on them. The importance of our discussion besides preparing too many information about the dialogue, will come out most when we could perceive how different periods makes our reading different.

Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe are counted as two prominent contemporary political thinkers and philosophers. In recent years, they have tried to use their previous philosophers’ rich legacies to theorize about discourse, and to prepare a theoretical framework for analyzing it. So, they are two pioneers in theorizing about discourse. This essay wants to investigate de Saussurian- Lacanian concepts in their analysis of discourse.Laclau and Mouffe have insisted on the partial fixation of meaning. They have paid attention to de Saussure’s principle of ‘value’ and developed their specific way of conceptualizing. They have also borrowed the concept of ‘point de capiton’ from Lacanian psychoanalysis and called it ‘nodal point’. According to these theoretical backgrounds, they believe that neither absolute fixity nor absolute non-fixity of meaning is possible.

Theoretical optimism and pessimism are followed from the determination of the ontological and ethical relationship between the good and the evil of the world, based on special point of view and a priori or a posteriori arguments for it. However Schopenhauer's a priori point of view was the emphasis on the existence of the evil and the negation of the good, thereby he was a pessimistic, he defined the good as coordination between an individual object and a definite effort of the will. Thus, he defined the evil as absence of such coordination. Although Schopenhauer's approach to the problem of the evil subject to his metaphysics of the will and the representation, it is along with the history of philosophy, within Christian tradition, and in a mutual relation with his life and time situations. From the total of the definitions of the suffering and enjoyment (Satisfaction), happiness and virtue, wrong and right, which he gave us, comes it to mind that Schopenhauer tied and linked each of them to the evil and the good. In addition, according to his view, in spite of the irrationality and absurdity of this worst possible world, one can find consolation in the aesthetic contemplation, tear the veil of delusion through compassion, and achieve salvation by denial of the will.

“Semanalysis” as a critical theory is based on Julia Kristeva researches in two fields of semiology and psychoanalysis. Kristeva putting together these two sciences in the literature theory or her speaking subject and method to analysis art and especially literature that mentioned in her opus. If take language symbolize order certain one with consciousness, it is possible to suppose semiology or “chora” as an unconscious part of language. In this manner Kristeva with her new interpret of semiology that is different with standard concept and meaning of it as a target science, makes relationship between semiology and psychoanalysis and aim to provide a theory on this for meaning in art and literature. Influence of semiology in to the language in fact it is return to suppression language. Semiology always penetrates to symbol structure of meaning and to establish flowing and lack of homogeneity from beginning in subject of writer. Semiology affair revival process of creation and basic prognosis of symbolize discipline.

Superlative theology presents the great knowledge of man about God: a knowledge above Perception knowledge. Where silence is the most eloquent language to describe Him. In Christianity, Pseudo- Dionysius, and in the Islamic world, Ibn-Arabi, are among the great thinkers that speak of Divine darkness and silence. In this paper the ideas of these two great thinkers are compared and their ideas about superlative theology surveyed. Although these two thinkers belong to different religious traditions and of source returns to their holy books, there is considerable relationship between their ideas. The common Point of thought of these thinkers about Superlative Theology is speaking of God who is far from Wisdom and Perception and we only can talk about Him by silence. God was and is in His Darkness and human kind must go beyond steps to union with Him and entrance to His darkness. The darkness of God is not only ontological, but also epistemological. Knowledge at this step is not intellectual knowledge and so we cannot speak of it. Silence represents union with this knowledge.