psychology

Literature deals with emotional faculties and the inner world of humans, and it can sometimes help alleviate psychological issues and strengthen individuals' mental balance. Therefore, a proper analysis of literary works can aid in a better understanding of the author's existence and nature. This article examines the hero's personality in the novel "The Idrisi House" based on Karen Horney's theory. Horney, as a revisionist of Freudian psychoanalysis, has either completed or revised Freud's theories. Horney's views on personality, especially her theories on personality types, reflect her personal experiences. Horney believes that the methods and strategies people use to protect themselves lead to the formation of three main personality types: the compliant, the aggressive, and the detached. This theory helps us gain a deeper understanding of characters' traits and motivations through precise analysis. The results indicate that in "The Idrisi House," Wahab is a detached and compliant personality seeking inner peace and the affection of others. Leqa is a compliant individual who, through kindness and empathy, seeks to attract attention and affection from others and readily follows orders. Mrs. Idrisi exhibits a combination of compliant and aggressive traits, striving to assist others while maintaining her power and status. Shaukat is an aggressive and vengeful individual who uses anger and demeaning behavior to maintain his superiority and views others as tools for achieving his goals..

Loneliness is not considered an illness by itself; however, it could be the origin of some physical and psychological diseases. In this paper, the authors introduce the different types of loneliness and investigate its physical and spiritual effects. Next, they explain Mullā Ṣadrā’s doctrine of the relationship between God and Man. Based on the principles of the Transcendent Philosophy, Man is closely related to God and desperately needs Him, and no separation between Man and God is imaginable. In such an atmosphere, the problem of loneliness is basically annulled. In other words, the feeling of loneliness is rooted in the ignorance of the structure of being. Thus, the removal of this ignorance, can lead to the removal of the feeling of loneliness and its negative effects. Such an approach is closely related to cognitive psychotherapy, based on which human feelings and emotions are not solely the product of people’s direct encounter with the external world. Rather, their interpretation of this world and the way they approach it play important roles in the formation of their feelings and emotions. Clearly, a change in an individual’s interpretations and views can lead to changes in their feelings and thoughts. Similarly, any change in one’s worldview can lead to a change in their analysis of their living conditions and place in the world of being. An individual who develops their worldview based on the Transcendent Philosophy will never feel separation from the world of being. Hence, they will never suffer from loneliness.

NDE is one of the topics of interest to thinkers of experimental sciences, philosophers and theologians. Psychologists have sought to analyze these experiences by presenting models of expectation, birth and personality transformation. Physiologists have considered it as hallucinations caused by the release of hormones, damage to the brain region, changes in blood pressure and similar causes. Each of the theories has flaws. The problem of research in this article is to compare the views of Islamic philosophy and mysticism on these experiences and compare them with the opinions of physicists. The research method of this article is based on the collection of mystical and philosophical information from the library method and data processing from the descriptive-analytical method and a critical comparison with the view of physicalists. The findings of this research indicate the possibility of comparing these experiences with mystical intuition and as a result of using mystical and philosophical criteria to evaluate them. The possibility of referring to these experiences to prove life after death, accepting moral and mystical advice on them while accepting the possibility of error and avoiding jurisprudential inferences based on them are other findings of this research.

The understanding of humans in any philosophical school influences their ultimate purpose, affecting their way of life and how they resolve conflicts. Building on the foundation of humanistic psychology, Maslow posits the theory of self-actualization, asserting that transcending basic needs related to deficiency allows for the full manifestation of innate talents to their highest potential. Fārābī, a philosopher of happiness with a special focus on the functions of the mind, thought, and aptitudes, links human perfection in material life to perfection in the afterlife, offering a comprehensive theory on perfection and happiness within the realm of the mind through the flourishing of innate talents governed by the bestowing of intellects. Despite their different worldviews, both thinkers ultimately regard human perfection and happiness as aligned with the blossoming and utilization of innate talents. This perspective redefines primary human experiences, such as suffering and transient pleasure, replacing them with satisfaction and happiness. This paper presents an analytical-comparative study of these two philosophers’ views on the definitions of perfection and happiness. It addresses how humans resolve worldly conflicts and problems and examines their solutions within physical, relational, emotional, intellectual, and meaningful perfection.

In the first view, the bases of psychology in Sohrawardi's works are subordinate to those of the followers, and this depicts a contradiction. On the other hand, according to the progress of Sheikh Ishraq's intellectual maturity, the difference can be referred to, but the intention in this matter is not far from the mind. So it should be checked that; Why did Sohrawardi, as an enlightened sage, also use the principles of Peripatetic in his works? This article analyzes the foundations of Shaykh Ishraq in the present knowledge of the soul in his philosophical, logical, and mystical works in his Persian treatises. By stating some shortcomings of the foundations in some perceptions, it deals with the hypothesis that in the results of Sohrawardi, although a contradiction can be seen. His intellectual maturity was also involved in this matter, but due to a specific purpose, it can be proven that this issue is intentional.

Ghazali is one of the Islamic scholars with research works in the field of jurisprudence, ethics, theology and philosophy. Despite his alleged opposition to philosophy and philosophical thinking, his works shows, especially in topics related to psychology, that he is a rationalist thinker who has benefited from the methods and approaches of Islamic philosophers. In the present article, using a descriptive-analytical method, we have surveyed Ghazali's views on logic and philosophy and their application in psychology and we have come to the conclusion that, contrary to the opinion of some researchers who have considered Ghazali a strict anti-philosophy theologian, he  should be considered a rationalist theologian who, in all stages of his life, even when he turned to Sufism, remained loyal to rational principles and methods and considered reason to be the most important criterion for the validity of any kind of knowledge. In psychology, he is totally influenced by peripatetic philosophy, and due to his strong attachment to Ibn Sina's philosophical method in psychology, he sometimes borrow words from his books to support his own views. He adheres to logical arguments and considers reason as the criterion for testing the validity of other means of knowledge, that is, tradition, experience and intuition. According to some of Ghazali's theoretical foundations such as the negation of causality between phenomena, it seems that, by replacing causality with the theory of habit of Allah, he has managed to solve some of the requirements of the negation of causality in psychology. But such a theory is not free of ambiguities and problems.

The common point of the various sections that make up Islamic theoretical philosophy is the apodictique knowledge of the world, although the apodictique principles of each section differ according to the subject of that section. In the classification of immediates, the specific principles of psychology fall into the category of sensa, which Avicenna attributes their perception to the internal senses and the very soul. One question is, based on the functions that Avicenna defines for each of them, whether any of the internal senses can be, next to the soul, the source of knowledge of the soul or not. The only faculty that is a candidate for this is the faculty of estimation. But its function is the perception of particular meanings, not the knowledge of the perception of particular meanings that leads to the knowledge of the soul. Another question is how the soul can know the animal and plant faculties of the soul that are material and impressed in the body. The present article, by examining the functions that Avicenna attributes to the faculties of the soul, shows that none of the external and internal senses of the soul are used for the knowledge of the soul, and that it is the soul itself that knows the apodictique principles of psychology by perceiving itself and its states and actions immediately. In addition, knowledge of the animal and material faculties of the soul is achieved through the direct perception of actions of these faculties, which are at the same time accidents of the soul.

Interaction between knowledge branches can have good achievements for human society. Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches also have the potential to bring us, albeit by a few steps, closer to what the real world is. However, this is not always the case! Sometimes the guild of epistemology longs to go beyond its own territory and dominate other guilds of knowledge, and this is the scientific imperialism of one branch of knowledge over the other. In this article, I try to show such a colonial interaction regarding the dominance of the school of nominalism over sociology in the form of the domination of psychology and economics. The research methods used in this article are of two types: library and basics analysis. The finding shows that nominalist social ontology can lead to the isolation and diminution of the social and the fattening of individual-centered discourse. In particular, the fact that both psychology and economics have pioneered this. In such a way that the imperialist epistemology of these two types of knowledge is increasingly dominating sociological thinking. In a way, their individual-centered ontologies have dominated the collective ontologies of sociology, and this type of ontology has also increasingly dominated the analysis of social issues. These conditions have led to a kind of reductionism in the analysis of social events. In addition, sciences such as economics and psychology, based on individualistic ontologies, try to explain phenomena that are clearly social in nature, and this is nothing but an imperialist invasion of the field of knowledge that can lead to fallacies. This imperialism causes it to create double darkness instead of shedding light on the path of knowledge.

The nature and perfection of man in view point of Roger and its critique based on Sinaitic philosophy is the subject of this paper. The school of Humanism is one of the most important schools of psychology of the twentieth century, which has serious criticisms of other schools of psychology, especially Psychoanalysis and Behaviorism. The reason for the tendency towards humanistic psychology was a situation in which psychology had been condemned for years and, by limiting itself to the study of behavior, had neglected man himself and instead focused on secondary factors. Rogers is one of the most influential psychologists in the school. As the inventor of the "person-centered treatment" method, he played a major role in advancing this school. The turning point of Rogers’s psychology can is positive attention to human beings. But while Rogers' views are progressive compared to those of previous psychologists, they do have significant drawbacks. In this paper, the principles of human nature and human perfection in Rogers psychology are analyzed and critiqued using Avecinna’s philosophy.

This research wants to find the answer of this question that in defining soul by Al-Ghazali, how much he has followed Aristotle and is Al-Ghazali's interpretation of the Aristotelian psychology, a theological interpretation, or philosophical one, or both of them.Aristotle, while presenting two types of natural and metaphysical definitions of the soul, in natural definition, considers the soul relation to the body and in metaphysical definition, independent. He considers the knowledge of the soul in relation to the knowledge of the living being, but Al-Ghazali, with a religious approach and from the perspective of Shari'at, considers the knowledge and truth of the soul, related to the truth of death and self-knowledge; emphasizing the need to know the human soul to achieve divine knowledge. He considers the soul as a mirror, looking into which, one may meet God. In his philosophical definition of the soul, Al-Ghazali like Aristotle, states that the soul is the first perfection and believes that the soul is perceived only by reason.

The word “amniyyat” (security) is an infinitive from the word “amn” (secure). The word “amn” literally means reassurance, a sense of calmness, and a lack of fear and anxiety. According to this definition, the terms “amniyyat” and “amn” have both positive and negative dimensions; that is, on the one hand, they indicate confidence and peace of mind, and on the other hand, they indicate the absence of fear and anxiety. Psychological security means a relative feeling of relief from danger, and the result of this feeling is a pleasant state that entails physical and mental peace. Using jurisprudence and psychology, the present study has tried to investigate the components that decrease family’s psychological security and to present the mechanism of providing psychological security by proposing security-providing strategies based on these two areas of knowledge. Using the analytical-descriptive method and the perspective of Shahid Avval described as "Masalih-e khamseh" in jurisprudence, the article explores key issues in the field of psychological security. On the other hand, using psychology, it examines the commonalities and differences of these two areas of knowledge in the field of psychological security. However, due to the limited capacity of the article, an attempt has been made to pay attention to the most central factors increasing or decreasing security. Addressing other components of psychological security is beyond the scope of this study.

The issue of intelligence is one of the fundamental issues of human and one of the few issues that human beings is faced in all areas. It plays an essential role in various scientific fields, industries, individual and social life measures, etc. Intelligence is defined as a set of diverse general talents and abilities including learning and understanding things, adapting to the environment, utilizing past experiences, analyzing, applying sound judgment, and reasoning and finding the logical solution in the face of different situations and problems. However, so far the true nature of intelligence has not been introduced by scientists and they have limited themselves to its definition, function and types. The fancy in Sadra’s philosophy is degraded intellect. Fancy replaces reason in relation to matter and imagination and perceives meanings and generalities when they added to details and instances. With a close look at the system of Sadra’s philosophy and intelligence in the view of scientists; it can be argued that the fancy in transcendent wisdom is related to intelligence and can be analyzed in relation to each other.

As science grows, the branches of science distance themselves from the main stem and sometimes, as necessary, re-establish themselves in the position of connecting and interacting with other branches. After the separation of psychology from philosophy, many attempts have been made to establish links between epistemology - as one of the main branches of philosophy - on the one hand, and empirical psychology - as one of the separate branches of philosophy - on the other hand. Using analytical-descriptive methods the aim of the present study is to explain new paths based on psychological texts that allow the closeness of two independent branches of epistemology and psychology more than before; paths that can be less traced in the domestic research literature. In this direction, what is more intended is to send epistemological services to psychology, not the other way around. Theories and findings of psychology, as one of the disciplines of the humanities, are more subservient to cultures, values, and anthropological and epistemological foundations; therefore, epistemological services to psychology will be important. In this article, while discussing the possibility and necessity of exchanging communication and services between these two fields of study, four communication paths have been specifically identified and examined in more detail, which are: explanation and critique of psychological theories, explanation and critique of research methodology, explanation and critique the norms and tools used in psychology and finally critique the common grammar in psychology. It is said that in the nineteenth century, empirical psychology was separated from philosophy. Bishop and Trout, narrate the separation of the two. For much of the history of Western reasoning, from Plato to Kant, psychology has been a part of philosophy. But in the mid- nineteenth century, psychology created a rift, and divorce was introduced with Wundt's laboratory. Since then, philosophy, like a failed lover, has been trying to revive this relationship (Bishop & Trout, 2005). Psychology took the empirical path and philosophy as an intellectual and argumentative science continued its independent path. After decades of apparent separation, signs of a connection between the two areas reappeared. The simplest argument is that it is not possible to find a well- known psychologist who does not adhere to any kind of philosophical thought or theory just for the sake of his positive or negative attitude towards philosophy; nor is there a psychological school that does not presuppose some philosophical principles (Hatami, 2010). The reconnection between philosophy and psychology occurred especially in the most central branch of philosophy, epistemology. For example, when epistemological issues such as the process of feeling, memory, imagination and concept were considered by psychologists, the two approached each other and began their interactions (Fa'ali, 2000, second edition, p.39). Another event that brought philosophy and psychology closer together was the evolution of the philosophy of science, in which psychology sought to move beyond the positivist empirical science. The views of Thomas Cohen, Lakatosh and Feyerabend were effective in this regard (Azarbayjani, 2012, pp.14-15). Breaking the barrier of empiricism spontaneously paved the way for interaction with other non-empirical realms, especially philosophy. However, it should be noted that establishing a link between philosophy and psychology, and especially between the central branch of philosophy, namely epistemology and psychology, as it may seem, will not be an easy task. Goldman (1985) emphasizes that many attempts have been made to make the connection between epistemology and psychology, but little agreement has been reached on how such a connection should be made. Therefore, the study of ways to link these two areas of study should continue. Another proof is the book "Difficult Chapters in the Relationship between Psychology and Epistemology", published in 1989, edited by Hess. As the title suggests, linking these two areas, while necessary, is not an easy task.Leading study is an attempt to clarify the communication between epistemology (as one of the branches of philosophy) with contemporary psychology.

The tendency to the origin of existence and the desire for immortality have always been the concern of human beings. Divine religions consider faith as the only way to respond to these two issues. Undoubtedly, the different views of religions on the concept of faith have led to different interpretations. Thus, not only is the expression of the components of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam different, but also the interpretation of different Islamic sects of faith is different. Because of this, the efforts of experts to properly conceptualize this fact have paved the way for the emergence of different perspectives. The aim of the present study is to compare the stages of the evolution of faith from the perspective of Islam and Fowler. The research method and the technique for gathering data were descriptive and library-based. The findings showed that the Abrahamic religions, especially Islam in the verses of the Holy Quran, consider faith as a kind of strong heart relationship and psychologists consider it as an internal tendency to the origin of the universe that mental growth and evolution in human understanding can play a role in its evolution.

In this article, in addition to proclaiming a position regarding the typical unity or plurality of the human souls, we are seeking to find a proper resolution for the psychological riddle of the human’s quiddity. One of the issues in the philosophical psychology is the question regarding the typical unity or plurality of the human souls. The Muslim scholars have offered a variety of opinions in this regard and, in addition to presenting some arguments, they have used evidences from the Quran and hadith in establishing their idea. Some of the Islamic philosophers believe in the typical unity of the souls and some others believe in the species plurality of the souls. Among them, Mulla Sadra has presented a middle line in some of his books, believing in an initial unity in type of the souls and, at the same time, their typical plurality in the process of a substantial motion. This philosophical issue has a formative association with the psychological discussion posed under the title of the ‘human’s psychological nature’, wherein the scholars have offered various, an even contrasting, views. Some have regarded human’s quiddity as neutral, some have regarded it as having evil leanings, and some others have attributed good leaning to it. By resolving the issue of the typical unity or plurality of the souls in Islamic philosophy, a proper answer would be given to the question posed in psychology.