علی فتح طاهری

This paper evaluates the embodied mind perspective in light of disembodied approaches to the mind. According to disembodied approaches, the body plays no fundamental role in constituting the mind. Mind and body are considered two distinct entities. This distinction is sometimes ontological and sometimes based on properties or characteristics. In these approaches, the body is described as a substrate, tool, neural realization, or container. In contrast, the embodied mind perspective argues that the mind is inherently embodied. The body constitutes the mind. Mind and body are not two distinct entities, but rather a single entity. Concepts, thoughts, emotions, and in sum, mental states and processes are fundamentally embodied. This means that the body plays a pivotal role in their formation. In this perspective, the body is the constitutive, not the substrate or tool. What supports this approach is a collection of empirical and cognitive findings. Based on these findings, the brain, body, and the surrounding environment together form a dynamic system, and mind and cognition are the consequences of this dynamic system. This approach is not merely about description or explanation; rather, the embodied mind is the outcome of an interdisciplinary approach that is supported by numerous empirical findings. However, this approach is not without its criticisms. The most prominent critiques highlight several key issues, including ambiguities in its fundamental principles, a lack of empirical evidence, insufficient consideration of higher-order cognitive processes, and the reductionist tendency to reduce all mental states to physical states. In this paper, we seek to critically analyze and evaluate this perspective, examining its theoretical underpinnings within the broader academic discourse.

The concept of the subject is very important for the contemporary French philosopher, Alain Badiou, and it is discussed in works such as the Theory of the subject, Ethics, Being and Event, and the Logic of worlds. Paying attention to the changes and developments in Badiou's thought leads us to the conclusion that his perspective on the subject has also undergone changes. For the first time in his book Theory of the Subject, he examines the concept of the subject. A time still under the influence of Althusser and Mao, Therefore, the basis of the subject is social actions and purely political functions and the ontological foundations of the subject are not examined by him. While, later in the last course of his thought, He writes the book "Being and Occurrence" with an ontological subject as his focus, and his attention to subtractive ontology leads him to a mathematical subject. finally, in the Logic of Worlds, it continues its evolutionary path, one we believe transforms the subject from a purely human and political awe to a finite and abundant part of an infinite truth in subtractive situations. In this article, while examining the above path, we mentioned some criticisms in this regard because we believe that Badiou's explanation of the subject contains flaws that are in conflict with the logic of subtractive ontology.

By challenging the traditional philosophy of the West, which he believes has led to various useless theoretical duplications throughout the history of philosophy, he tries to deconstruct the various issues of philosophy and eliminate these dualities in the context of a "culture of literary salvation.” By creating a dividing line between the private sphere and the public sphere, Rorty seeks to determine the contribution of philosophers to theoretical and philosophical views, and to argue that the sphere of politics does not need to base and obtain its principles from individual criteria of the private sphere; What sets the stage for philosophers' metaphysical ambitions? It is as if Rorty, by reducing philosophy to literature, wants to prevent the ambitions and interventions of philosophers through theorizing. He believes that by distinguishing between the private and public spheres of politics, the philosopher's tool and his field of thought is literary culture and his position is the private sphere. In this article, we will try to describe Rorty's utopia and analyze his claims from different angles.

The issue of self-knowledge, while ancient, has always been both challenging and paradoxical. In this paper, considering that the "self" is the central axis of Kant’s thought in all three Critiques, we will attempt to analyze the mystery surrounding self-knowledge in Kant’s philosophy. To this end, we will briefly examine the following points: (1) What is the difference between self-consciousness and knowledge of the "self"? (2) Awareness of something without having knowledge of it is one of the dilemmas of Kantian philosophy, and this becomes more pronounced when it comes to the "self." However, this mystery cannot be seen as a flaw in Kant’s philosophy, as in the discourse on self-knowledge, the self is always a logical step behind itself. (3) Finally, despite Kant’s claim that the thing-in-itself has no relation to time, we will explore the connection between the "self" as a thing-in-itself and time, which contributes to the mystery of the "self."

One of the basic goals of development is to achieve social welfare for all, and creating a platform for suitable environment for business and employment in any country are crucial factors in driving economic growth, prosperity and ultimately increasing the economic and social welfare of the population. Given the instrumental role of employment in the realization of social well-being, this research firstly aims to empirically identify and define the factors influencing employment and well-being. This research uses a documentary method and semi-structured interviews with experts and specialists in the field of employment and well-being in the Ministry of Labor, Cooperation and social Welfare. In the second step, after counting the factors and key components affecting the future of employment and prosperity of the country, these factors were arranged within a mutual matrix and presented to experts, and then using Micmac software (MIC MAC) the direct and indirect effects of variables on each other were measured. Finally, the research showed that economic structure variables, investment, business environment, welfare system and social justice as two-dimensional variables, policymaking variables, international relations, laws and regulations and banking system as influencing variables, educational system variables and banking system as regulatory variables, variables of the payment system and human resources were recognized as dependent variables, and the variables of the educational system, cultural system, and technology were recognized as independent variables.
Based on the degree of influence and effectiveness of the variables, the priority of policy variables, economic structure, investment, international relations, laws and regulations, business environment, banking system, welfare system, social justice and education system were the most important key drivers affecting the employment and social welfare of the country.

The present article attempts to explore two principles out of four literary and poetic principles with the centrality of Kant's conceptual turn concerning the concept of time that Deleuze opted for treating Kant's philosophy. In order to reformulate the Critique of Pure Reason, Deleuze exploits two literary principles. The first one is taken from Hamlet according to which time is out of control, the second one is taken from Arthur Rambo as he said, I is another. For appreciating such complicated statements and explaining Deleuze's particular reading of Critique of Pure Reason, the author proceeds to explore Deleuze's writings and seminars on Kant in order to show that the presupposition of having a good command over Deleuze's philosophy is to study his confrontation with Kant's philosophy. For achieving such an end, the author accompanies Deleuze's treatment of Kant's philosophy step by step in order to shed some light on the concept of time in his reading of The Critique of Pure Reason from various perspectives so to apprehend the two poetic principles concerning the time.

It has been more than a decade since the term antiphilosophy became popular; A term that Jacques Lacan, a French psychoanalyst, used in one of his seminars, and later Alain Badiou used this term and wrote books about it. Although antiphilosophy may seem to be completely against philosophy, this interpretation is not very accurate. Antiphilosophy is generally against philosophical claims regarding the category of truth. Against such claims that there is a universal truth and it is only in the minds of a few elite philosophers. Therefore, and as the third issue, antiphilosophy considers the lived experience. In addition to these three concepts, other concepts are the focus of antiphilosophy, and this article tries to address the most important of these concepts. Also, the nature of antiphilosophy and its relationship with philosophy are examined. We will also take a look at antiphilosophy in the context of the history of philosophy and see which of the thinkers had antiphilosophical thoughts in this context.

Rhetoric, being among five arts of logic (i.e., Sana’at Khams), is a persuasive yet uncertain art. However, philosophers consider it as a non-philosophical and invalid art. In such a view, this art has no philosophical value and its users seek to deceive and influence the audience in order to attract their attention, so logical speech must be de-rhetorical. The study of early philosophers, especially Aristotle, shows that rhetoric is not one of the branches of uncertain logic, but it is a political tool and is a complementary art in practical philosophy, and because practical philosophy is one of the branches of philosophy, it is also related to philosophy. Plato considered rhetoric to be against the politics of society. Aristotle, also under the influence of Plato, first criticized the common discourse of his time, which relied on the Forensic type and sophistic method. Then, he tries to teach a desirable version of rhetoric for the prosperity of society, considering the necessity of rhetoric in political societies. Aristotle uses enthymeme to relate rhetoric to premises and to highlight its political nature by emphasizing the deliberative rhetoric. This study aims to investigate this proposition in Aristotle’s thoughts, and clarify the political implications of rhetoric.

Since futures studies was faced by the challenge of being stablished as a discipline, and many of futurists insisted on the necessity of this matter for futures studies, this research is to analyse disciplinary possibility of futures studies. Also, it is to determine its position between academic disciplines.

At first part of this research, analysing of satisfying disciplinary criteria by futures studies from epistemological, social, and organisaional approaches was used. At second part, position of futures studies between academic disciplines was determined through applying well-known disciplines categories.

The results showed that futures studies include particular object of inquiry; body of accumulated specialist knowledge; specialized theories and concepts; various practical methods; scientific paradigms; shared discourse, language, peers, identity; and application in action. It was identified that futures studies due to its disciplinary capabilities, can be considered as a discipline and in disciplines categories, it is an applied and soft discipline and is posited in the broader domain of applied social sciences.

While futures studies satisfies disciplinary criteria, it needs to be developed in two areas: first one is development of its philosophical and epistemological foundations, so that it exits from its baseless situation; second one is its academic development at different higher education levels so that to reach its real position in academy.

This article aims to review and critique Kant's philosophy of mind, its impact on contemporary philosophy of mind, also its impact and relation to functionalism. Kant's influence on philosophy is based on the answers and methods he uses to explain the mechanism of human knowledge. The Copernican revolution of Kant refers to the change in epistemological direction of the object to the subject, for the correct understanding of the object. This approach has had important effects on contemporary philosophy of mind. Now our goal is to explore some of these effects.

Our study method in this article is evaluate these effects in the field of contemporary philosophy of mind and especially, contemporary functionalism.

Kant attempts to explain the mechanism of human cognition by considering the mind as a structured thing that has some cognitive faculties, including the faculties of sense, understanding, and reason. In brief, the effects of such a mechanism in the contemporary philosophy of mind can be expressed in the following cases: (1) The need for a necessary structure of thought and experience. (2) The relationship between certain forms of consciousness and self-consciousness; and (3) excluding the Cartesian self. (4)The separation between sense and understanding is considered as the rise of the subjective matter from a physical foundation, and it indicates the hard problem of consciousness, that is, experience or phenomenal consciousness.

It is not possible to see the influence of Kant's philosophy of mind on the contemporary philosophy of mind as answers or even solutions, but as a way of thinking about problems. Kant's solutions have two characteristics, disregarding them will lead to a misunderstanding of his philosophy. First, Kant has expressed his philosophy of mind in a transcendental form. Taking him out of his vital form certainly leaves some of the most significant aspects of his philosophy behind. Secondly, his approaches are presented in a historical context. For instance, we should consider Kant's statement on the structures of the mind to be a metaphysical mechanism, and his perspective on causation is basically meaningful in a historical context. Admittedly, many of the problems raised in contemporary philosophy were discussed in Kant's philosophy, but the progress and transformation that occurs in these concepts cannot be attributed to Kant. The functionalist interpretation of Kant is possible, but it is in conflict with the most crucial teachings of Kant, which are architecture and the transcendental method. Such a reading excludes many aspects of an individual's mental life, and is based on a purely formal similarity.

This paper analyzes and criticizes Swanson’s position on the relationship betweenthe predictive processing paradigm (hereafter called PP) and Kant’s philosophy. According to Swanson, this paradigm is rooted in the works of Immanuel Kant. He explains and demonstrates this connection in cases such as (1) top-down analysis, (2) the mind and causal structures of the world, (3) reversal and the Copernican revolution, (4) hyperpriorities and forms of intuition, (5) generative models and schemata, and (6) analysis by synthesis. In evaluating his point of view, we demonstrate that his claim encounters difficulties in at least two general instances: first, his reading of PP is completely selective, and he does not consider the significant differences between different readings. Second, his reading of Kant is naturalized and experimental. Such a reading disregards and wipes out the most basic concepts of Kant’s transcendental philosophy, that is, the self or self-conscious subject. Besides, Kant’s approach to the mind is metaphysical, while PP’s approach to the brain is completely empirical. Hence, if there is a fundamental conflict between the PP paradigm and Kant’s transcendental philosophy, then the assertion of compatibility between them faces serious difficulties.

Future studies as an emerging field has faced many challenges in the last few decades, the most serious of which is leaving the baselessness situation and being equipped with philosophical foundations in order to transform into a scientific field. In this regard, it is faced with basic questions such as how to do research on the future that has not yet been realized, and whether it is even possible to gain knowledge from future-oriented statements. In response to these questions, the authors of the present article first undertake to identify the areas of research about the future and then analyze the serious epistemological issues facing them. Also, taking these issues into consideration, the possibility of gaining knowledge from future assumptions has been analyzed through the lens of three laws of thought. Finally, the authors have explored into the main theories of truth and justification in relation to the future propositions and have proposed theories that are suitable for creating a justified true belief in the future propositions. The results gained by this article indicate that there is an initial possibility of gaining knowledge from future-oriented beliefs. In this regard, the theory of truthfulness has been analyzed and proposed to verify the truth of these beliefs and the theories of introversion and moderate fundamentalism to justify them.

In Deleuze: The Clamor of Being, Badiou presents his views on Deleuze's ontology, and by enumerating some features in Deleuze's view, he finally calls him a philosopher of the one who relies on the Stoic view of what overthrows Plato. The reader was unsuccessful and his philosophical project has not achieved anything in the end except the surrender of plurality to unity. For Badiou, who considers only the mission of the contemporary philosopher to break away from the concept of unity in any way, concepts such as the spiritual communion of existence and the eternal return will only reach the equality of existence and unity, and even the difference in Deleuze ontology will ultimately be a function of the "same" and a single leader. In this article, we will try to enumerate some of Badiou's critiques on the relationship between Deleuze and the Stoic view, as well as apply the concept of eternal return and his view of Deleuze as a philosopher of the one thing and finally, defend difference and repetition as multiplicity based versions and show that the fundamental root of Badiou's critiques can be seen in his incoherent conception of unity and the deliberate confusion of the concepts of the spiritual commonality of existence and unity.

One of the basic goals of development is to achieve universal social welfare and the existence of social welfare in any society is considered as one of the most important characteristics of the development of that society and the reproducer of its development. Laying the groundwork for creating a suitable business and employment environment in any country is one of the important factors in creating economic growth and prosperity and ultimately increasing the economic and social welfare of the people. Therefore, considering the important role that employment can play in realizing the concept of social welfare, in the present study, attempts have been made to identify and rank the key factors and components affecting the employment and social welfare status in Iran.

In this study, in order to identify and accurately define the components affecting employment and welfare, the documentary method and semi-structured interviews were conducted with the experts and specialists of the field of employment and welfare working in the Ministry of Cooperatives, Labor, and Social Welfare. Hierarchy factorization (AHP) and Expert Choice software have been used.

The results show that the investment sub-criterion with a relative weight of 0.115 has the highest priority, and then the sub-criteria respectively are policy-making, banking system, production, and business environment, laws. Then regulations, tax system, international relations, economic indicators, payment system, insurance and social security, justice and equality, manpower, domestic technologies, culture, foreign technologies, and education system were also the sub-criteria identified in the study.

The most important and key factor that can affect the employment and welfare in the country is the concept of investment. In economic theories, investment is known as the engine of economic growth, and is necessary for economic and social development, and it is one of the most important pillars in the growth and development of production units and enterprises.

In this article with a study of the meaning of substance in empirical philosophers’ viewpoints, we show that Hume's negation of substance has influenced Kant's theory of knowledge. To solve the problem of knowledge, Kant, on the one hand, turns the substance negated by Hume into a thing in itself. In this way, he tries to provide a strong foundation for the phenomena and keep his philosophy from falling into the abyss of absolute idealism. On the other hand, with the Copernican revolution, he turned the substance into one of the categories and determinations of the subject. In this way, he kept its essential role in the formation of knowledge and paved the way for the object to correspond with the mind. Therefore, in a sense, Kant preserves the substance in the meaning of the predecessors, but no epistemic role is possible for this meaning; however, he tries to maintain the epistemic position of the substance in another sense. The reason why Kant, while transforming the substance of the predecessors into a thing in itself, did not abandon the substance, but presented another definition of it, was to be able to explain perception. Because he needed a permanent thing, of course, a permanent thing that can be pointed to its position with the subject, not an unchanging existence that is unknown with the objects.

Belief in the external world and the problem of the objective reference of ideas is a fundamental question that every epistemological approach tries to provide an answer to. In Descartes's philosophy, according to the cogito principle (cogito ergo sum), first I and then the world are proved, yet the distinction between I and the world, or subject and object, always raises the question of how the objective reference of our ideas is proved. And what are they? Are objects mind-independent? Or are they the same things we see, feel, smell, taste or touch? In other words, are they just sense data or are they imaginary data? And whether objects are mind-independent, but we have perceptions of them and receive sense data from them? Empiricists such as Locke, Berkeley, and Hume have each given reasons for explaining this objective reference. In this article, we first investigate the views of each of these philosophers from the concept of idea and the object, then examine and analyze their beliefs about the origin of ideas and the external world, and try to critically point out the flaws in each. Finally, on two levels: (1) the existence of external objects and (2) their conformity with the ideas of the mind, we investigate the problem of skepticism and show which of these philosophers' beliefs can be considered to lead to skepticism.  And which one cannot believe.

Critiquing the ontology of essence, Gilles Deleuze, in the Logic of Sense, provides an “ontology of sense” in which the notion of ‘sense’ as its central point is developed to establish a connection between thought and existence. Employing Stoic logic and concepts such as lekta, event, effect, expression, etc., and also applying Leibniz’s concepts of convergence and divergence relation between series of singularities- events, he presents his new ontology. This paper, aims to examine the notion of ‘sense’ in Deleuze’s Logic of Sense and provide an account for his conception of ‘Ontology of Sense’. So, after a glimpse at the ground which it grows and departs from, we go further to determine the topology of sense in Deleuze’s thought and get closer to understanding his ontology of sense, by making its connections with other concepts and ideas. Finally, we hope these steps could illuminate the relation between language and existence in Deleuzian philosophy.

For Heidegger, ontology begins with a critique of the metaphysical history after Plato, explaining the ontological distinction, the dangers of modern science, and mathematical thinking in shaping the nihilism of modern man, and finally the poetic view of Mathematics continues to develop the world for Dasein. For Heidegger, Being is the pure richness that manifests itself in various ways in Dasein, and mathematical thinking, not the guide to existence, is the main cause of its neglect, as well as its neglect, throughout the history of metaphysics. Alan Badiou, on the other hand, considers mathematics to be ontology in his most fundamental philosophical case, and exposes the differential versions, which he claims to be a staunch critic of the anti-mathematical view and, instead, of Heidegger's poetry. In this article, we try to present Badiou's critique of Heidegger's approach to mathematics, to mention his reasons for the mathematical view of what he calls poetic ontology, and finally to show Badiou, no matter how objectionable Whether his criticisms of Heidegger are justified or not, but in order to achieve his goals in ontology, he is forced to formulate and present them.

Husserl reached a point of crisis on the position of his philosophy and subsequently arose an evolution in his thought in 1906. In addition to his presence in the neo-Kantian atmosphere of universities of Germany, he also read Kant’s work immediately, and this matter provided a ground for him to passage from the happened crisis. The transcendental turn of Husserl happened through acquaintance with Kant, and his phenomenology found another property in Ideas . Kant influenced him in matters such as “transcendental reduction,” “constitution of objects” and “intentional object”, but despite these influences and being some common problems and origins, his transcendental phenomenology ran a different way. Differences between Kant and Husserl stem from different views about the relation of knowledge and reality. In Kant, on one hand, is preserved our relation with reality, but on the other hand, knowledge bears limitations. In contrast, in Husserl’s phenomenology, we find knowledge more developed and being released itself from Kantian limitations and consequently losing its foundation in reality and goinog on the side of absolute idealism.

Many epistemologists acknowledge that the importance of Gettier’s counterexamples is in revealing the problem we encounter when analyzing the concept of knowledge. As they assert, the root of the problem lies in the way we evaluate our intuitions used for conceptual analysis. We, here, are to look into those intuitions which, more than the nature of knowledge, are related to knowledge attribution in ordinary language. It seems likely that they help us find out a way to remove Gettier’s counterexamples or other similar cases known today as Gettier-type counterexamples. The article consists of two main parts. First, we will explain three proposals that result in taking away the condition of justification, truth and belief, respectively. Taking away one of the traditional conditions of knowledge can be a possibe way to protect the conceptual analysis of knowledge from Gettier (Gettier-type) counterexamples. In the second part, we will clarify why these three proposals, and similar ones, have not yet been able to remove Gettier (Gettier-type) counterexamples. We believe that they have three main flaws. (1) Not all possible cases of knowledge are covered. (2) Some arguments are not conclusive. (3) They either involve some misunderstandings about the nature of ordinary language and the way its words work, or, from a methodological viewpoint, are ill-founded and have controversial consequences. Although the first and second flaws are limited to those proposals criticized in this article, we believe that the third one can go even further and include those proposals that pave the way to remove Gettier (Gettier-type) counterexamples by relying on our intuitions about the nature of knowledge.

This article, focusing on the inclusion- in- notion principle in the philosophy of Leibniz and its reading by Gilles Deleuze, claims that Deleuzian approach in the philosophical critique of the philosophy of Leibniz leads to recreation of the concept of the fold and the subject of fold in Leibnizian thought. To achieve this goal, we initially provide an in-depth study of this principle and its related principles in his philosophy and place emphasis upon their ontological aspect. Then we organize Deleuze’s reading of Leibniz’s philosophy around the inclusion-in-notion principle and picture the world of foldings as the outcome of such reading. We make an effort to clarify how the reading of this principle by Deleuze creates new possibilities in the philosophy of Leibniz and gives birth to the Leibnizian- Deleuzian subject of the fold. Therefore, in the last step, we study this Leibnizian- Deleuzian subject and its characteristics, which is the result of the inclusion- in- notion principle.

According to the principle of “impossibility of the knowledge of effect without the knowledge of cause”, it is not possible to attain any certain knowledge of an effect prior to attaining the knowledge of its cause. Based on logicians’ reading of this principle, it is only our acquired knowledge, which is obtained through reasoning, that conforms to this principle. Nevertheless, Mullā Ṣadrā provides an innovative analysis of the mentioned principle and, in contrast to logicians, concludes that it applies to all types of knowledge, whether acquired, presential, axiomatic, or theoretical. Some commentators of Mullā Ṣadrā’s works do not agree with his new interpretation of this principle and maintain that it is defective. However, the present study reveals that his perception is compatible with his own ontological principles, and the criticisms advanced by his commentators originate in their lack of attention to them.

educators criticized this concept and said that the teaching process should be led by the teacher alone and students cannot and shouldn’t play a role in this process. Buber pointed out that there must be a safe distance between teacher and student to maintain the educational relationship; meanwhile, introduced the doctrine of “Education based on Dialogue”. In other words, he calls the educational relationship as a kind of “I – Thou relationship”. Now the question is that while Buber knows the “I – Thou relationship” as a mutualrelationship, how can he interpret the relationship between teacher and student as a “I – Thou relationship” and at the same time he says it is one-sided inclusive.

Gilles Deleuze, the great postmodern philosopher, in his cinematic works, Cinema 1: movement-image and Cinema 2: time-image, provides a profound and unique narrative of the relation between philosophy and cinema, which seems to go beyond the usual theory of film. It is the very idea of a connection between image and reality, or cinema and ontology of the image, which makes a huge distance between his views on the cinematic and conventional theoretical-cinematic approaches. In this paper, by depicting Deleuze’s cinematic thinking, we will show its special significance in the film critique field and even in the philosophical thought. It is not by accident that his philosophy begins with the priority of simulacrum and image in a project called ‘overturning Platonism’. We consider how Deleuze regards cinema as a form of philosophizing (and vice versa) and how they can change or expand the boundaries of each other; at the same time, we examine the powers and limitations of this approach, in terms of some sort of elitism which we can find in his books. Understanding Deleuze’s cinematic thought allows us to rethink the constantly consolidated themes of traditional philosophy and even to recognize the mutual dynamism and linkage of thought with modern phenomena such as cinema, as a special field which works with movement, time and image.