s truth

The discussion about the thought and views of Ayn-al-Qużāt Hamadānī, the famous mystic of the 6th century, has always been attractive due to his special mystical-philosophical system of thought, as well as his openness and exemplary carelessness in expressing his inner thoughts. Along with the rational view of a religious philosopher, he has presented a different view from the point of view of a mystic. One of the important things in the intellectual system of Ayn-al-Qużāt Hamadānī is his definition and analysis of the category of” wisdom”. He has specified a way for wisdom, and where the wisdom cannot reach, he calls it beyond wisdom, and to achieve this, the eyes of human insight must be opened. Moreover, the judge calls wisdom a “special measure” and believes it does not have the ability to reach the realm of the kingdom. Therefore, beyond wisdom, it is pure knowledge and insight that can guide the seeker to the truth of existence. By researching and pondering the works of Ayn-al-Qużāt Hamadānī, this article analyzes his philosophical-mystical points of views on the status and dignity of wisdom and also introduces the definition and characteristics of wisdom from his mystical point of view.

Laurence Lampert (1941-2024) has been known as the greatest contemporary Nietzsche scholar in North America. The main theme of his works can be addressed as the explanation of the notion of a Nietzschean history of philosophy; a new history of philosophy in which the genuine philosopher commands and legislates. From this point of view, philosophy faces two important theoretical and practical challenges. The theoretical challenge in discovering the truth is to face the deadly truth, in which to be is to be will to power. The practical challenge of philosophy is to translate truth into a livable form; the challenge that Strauss recognized as the challenge for philosophy to rule religion. The article “Nietzsche’s Challenge to Philosophy in the Thought of Leo Strauss” was written in order to explain these challenges and Nietzsche’s solutions for them. In the explanatory introduction to this article, I have tried to briefly introduce Professor Lampert’s life and works, then show the basic points of Lampert's understanding of Nietzsche, and finally, provide the reader with an overview of the argumentative structure of the article.

How to explain the truth of divine monotheism and the meaning of the oneness of the Supreme Being from the point of view of theologians and sages has always been discussed and debated. for its own reason and removing the duality between them by pointing to the existential poverty of Masavi, and by explaining the aspects of the principle of "the simple truth of all things" and arguing for it, he explained the view of "true monotheism" in existence and by explaining that Masavi is the source of all manifestations and The definition of the lights of the Holy Prophet is true, it means monotheism, which sometimes theologians have opposed this view, which is known as the unity of existence, but based on research and citation methods, it can be said that this view is exactly taken from the proverbial supplication of Ahl al-Bayt infallibility and purity. (peace be upon him), his enlightened narrations and numerous verses of the Holy Quran.

The glorious Quran has been revealed by God and has got the present form after passing some stages in the journey of revelation. The Quran uses different terms to refer to the origin of this descending journey, such as the Guarded Tablet, the Manifest Book, the Mother of Book, and the Manifest Imam. Using a descriptive-analytical method, the Quranic verses and the views of religious scholars, the present paper examines these terms. All these terms indicate a single truth which is the first creature of God and treasure of God's knowledge, in which the forms and destination of all creatures are preserved and no single atom in the universe is out of God's knowledge. The relationship between the Quran and this truth is the same as the relationship between a simple thing and a complex thing, and between a detailed thing and a general, ambiguous thing. The root of the Quran is fused simply in the Mother of Book and the Guarded Tablet, which is in detailed form in the descending journey. This descent is not in a separated and distant form; rather, it is manifested. The truth of the Guarded Tablet and the Mother of Book cannot be revealed to natural world, and the Prophet intuits it in ascending arc. The detailed and semi form of this truth can be revealed, which is revealed to the Prophet over time.

One of the significant topics in philosophy is the discussion of "priority and posteriority," which has long been a subject of contemplation and evaluation by philosophers. Among those who have made efforts in this regard and introduced innovations is Mullā Ṣadrā Shīrāzī. One of his innovations in the concept of priority and posteriority is "by-truth." This type of priority and posteriority varies in elucidation and interpretation in the works of Mullā Ṣadrā. In his book "Al-Shawāhid al-Rubūbiyyah," he presents a unique interpretation of priority-in-truth compared to his other works. In some of his works, he considers “priority-by-truth" as the precedence of the causal existence over the existence of the effect.He has also provided another interpretation of priority-by-truth by stating that the Almighty, with respect to His manifestation in His names as well as His descent in the hierarchical levels of His existential affairs, which are the contingent beings, is characterized by both priority and posteriority. His attribution to priority and posteriority belongs to His essence, and not to an extraneous matter beyond His essence.

The truth and reality are two fundamental philosophical concepts upon which pragmatists have specific and important discussions. This paper compares Peirce’s and James’s ideas – both of which have proposed theories that challenge traditional metaphysics - on these two fundamental concepts in order to answer two questions of (1) why James has a wider reputation, his thoughts are more pursued, and is also called the founder of pragmatism, while Peirce is the founder of Pragmatism; and (2) whether the two philosophers’ pragmatism in the theory of reality and truth has been able to free itself from metaphysical philosophy? To answer these questions, this paper addresses these two philosophers’ point of views toward the theory of the truth. Although, it seems that the two concepts of truth and reality have clear meanings, there is a difference of opinion among pragmatist philosophers. Therefore, investigating the meaning, types, criteria, and position of the truth and reality in pragmatism reflects these philosophers’ opinions on these two concepts and also, answers the research questions of this paper. To answer the research questions, this paper applied a qualitative method, used a desk study, reviewed previous studies on relevant topics, and applied analytical arguments and interpretations. This paper shows that pragmatism is based on the pragmatic maxim that Peirce wrote and James also accepted. The overall criterion of this maxim is the practical impact that are reflected in propositions, believes, and notions to evaluate their practical consequences. In their views, although there are some literal dissimilarities between different believes, they have the same practical impact and address the same matter. Thus, they made a link between the theory and practice.  However, their views on traditional metaphysics make a distinction between these two philosophers. Peirce considers the pragmatic maxim as a logical principle, connects it to the theory of meaning, and offers different criteria - such as correspodence, compatibility, coherence, and consensus of scientific community – for evaluating the truth. Therefore, he gives a social character to the truth and takes the traditional metaphysics away from his philosophy. James, however, ties it with the theory of the truth that make it incompatible with the traditional metaphysics and Pierce’s criteria. These characteristics put James’ pragmatism at the top of the later pragmatist thoughts. In addition, this article explains that although both, Peirce and James, proposed new and effective views on the truth and reality and relations between them and they challenged some of the principles of metaphysical philosophy. Therefore, they did not think outside the framework of metaphysical thinking, could not withdraw this position, and did not propose totally novel ideas.

The Epistemic Bubble and the Echo Chamber are two phenomena of the Post-Truth area that deny scientific knowledge. The Epistemic Bubble exposes the individual to unbalanced arguments by eliminating knowledge outside the bubble and strengthening trust in the knowledge within it. In contrast, the Echo Chamber does not eliminate the knowledge outside the chamber but makes it unreliable. This unreliability of knowledge outside the room is accompanied by an increase in trust in knowledge inside the Echo Chamber. Both of these phenomena are common in building trust in knowledge within their community and distrust of scientific knowledge. In this paper, using the analytical-descriptive method, a solution to get out of the Epistemic Bubble and the Echo Chamber is presented. In this path, first, the two phenomena of Epistemic Bubbles and Echo Chambers are examined. Then Hoyningen-Huene’s Systematicity theory will be introduced. Systematicity theory shows that in common subjects, scientific knowledge in nine dimensions is more systematic than everyday knowledge. According to this theory, systematicity means that scientific knowledge is not purely random or accidental, is not chaotic, not completely unplanned nor unordered, and is methodological. The results show that the comparative nature of this theory helps to distinguish between knowledge in the Epistemic Bubble or Echo Chamber and Science. This theory will help us find a way to check the reliability of the acquired knowledge and make it possible for the person to get out of the Epistemic bubble and the Echo Chamber.

The present article begins with the concept of post-truth in the Nietzscheian sense and ends with the concept of enchantment in the form of Nietzsche’s jester. By explaining the way in which the modern human encounters post-truth in the Covid19 era as a nontruth-truth, and distinguishing between the concepts of post-truth and fake news, the following questions arise: By encountering the post-truth, what kind of subjects are being constituted? And how will these subjects be constituted? I will exploit the Lacanian psychoanalytical perspective and method to prove my hypothesis, based on the fact that constituted subjects are hysterical subjects. The subjects that occur in a discourse turning and by questioning the master signifier, reveal the lack in knowledge of the Other and recognize that the truth is nontruth and illusion. Thus, the prelinguistic mythical desire (Delta) repulsed by the current discourse will be re-operated by the hysterical subject. According to the myth’s re-operation, overtaking the current discourse and their relationship with mythological studies in the sphere of Jungian analytical psychology, I will answer another question considering that how the enchantment in the information and virtual media era takes place and how we are moving toward a re-enchantment in Post-Covid19 era and which psychological archetype is projecting by this enchantment? At the end, the subjects’ enchantment in the era of virtual media projects the Explorer archetype and in the coming era of Post-Covid19 will be projected by Nietzscheian Jester/Clown.

The very relevance of the disabled has been argued and martyred many times by Sadr al-Mutalahin, and it is accepted that the existence of the disabled in its essence needs a cause, and this need is due to the cause of the disabled, and it is not possible for the disabled to have existence or lack of independence. ; What is at stake is whether it is possible for the intellect to consider the nature of the disabled independently of its cause, in other words, whether or not the disabled can be referred to as the independent of the intellect; In this article, we have stated that the reference to the independence of the intellect to disabilities is not in conflict with being external in nature, and that Mr. Sadr al-Mutallahin's arguments for denying the intellectual independence of the disabled are not complete.

It is known that Ibn Sina Has mentioned three arguments to prove the necessary of existent, that is the argument from causality, from movement, and the argument from necessity and possibility. With a little reflection, it becomes clear that none of these arguments are Ibn Sina's innovative demonstration and are clearly stated in the works of Aristotle, Kindi and Farabi. What is Ibn Sina's original demonstration in proving the necessity of existence is the argument that is requisite for his philosophical system, that is, the demonstration based on the rational analysis of "existence" which can be called the Ibn Sinai demonstration. Ibn Sina, by rational analysis of existence as rational truth, proves the being of necessary existent and divine attributes and actions. Whereas in the above three proofs, with the presumption of possible existence, God is proved. In this article, we show with arguments and  the evidences that Ibn Sina's main and innovative argument is based on his theory about existence. Existence in Ibn Sina's thought is a metaphysical and a priori truth. contemplating on Ibn Sina's theory about existence makes it clear that his argument is not of Anselm and Descartes' argument and is not subject to Kant's criticism. On this basis, Ibn Sina is the first to present an existential argument that, while preceding philosophers such as Anselm, is also significantly different from them.

The issue of faith and its compatibility or incompatibility with reason as well as the justification of religious beliefs based on rationality has long been considered as one of the most challenging issues in the philosophy of religion. Many philosophers and thinkers have examined this ambiguous issue and criticized each other's views. Soren Kierkegaard, a prominent Danish religious thinker known as the father of existentialism, is one of the most important theorists of the relationship between faith and reason. He considers the rationalization of faith to be contradictory. He believes that the realm of faith is separate from the realm of reason, and that faith has primacy over reason. According to him, faith is a subjective truth and a kind of passion, and the reason that seeks for objective truths can never comprehend subjective truths. This article consists of five sections. In Section (1) we examine the intellectual and philosophical foundations of Kierkegaard’s position. In Section (2) we describe Kierkegaard’s theory of the nature of faith, and in Section (3) we explore his theory about the relationship between reason and faith. In Section (4) we will introduce the notion of blissful human and the transcendental manifestation of existence from Kierkegaard's point of view.  Finally, in Section (5), we will conclude and summarize the obtained points and results.

The purpose of this study is to express the issue of time, aeon and everlasting (sempiternity) in the view of philosophers and verses of the Holy Quran, which seeks to express a philosophical understanding of time-related verses in the Holy Quran through descriptive and comparative analysis. Time is a restlessness existing that has no beginning and no end. The nature (quiddity) of time seems obvious, but in expressing nature (quiddity) is one of the most difficult issues. Philosophers have made great efforts to discover the truth of time in the material world and beyond in eternity. Although time is the result of the movement from power to action, it is not dedicated to the natural world and is present in all things and manifestations of existence. The time (aeon) that surrounds the time existentially, is with being time and not with being time. everlasting (sempiternity), the circumference to aeon and its esoteric aspect, and these three containers are located along each other in the existential levels (ranks) of the system of existence. Time has been used with various words in the Holy Qur'an, including verses related to the expression of Divine attributes and actions and the description of the world. A philosophical understanding of these verses, which is obtained in comparison with the views of philosophers, shows that time in Qur'anic events in proportion to its level of existence, has a meaning beyond time in the material world and has taken on a aeon and everlasting (sempiternity) truth.

I will argue that the more advanced semantic paradoxes do not cause any trouble with Tarski's solution to the liar paradox, i.e. drawing a hierarchical picture of language, but that they even go further to provide guidance for discovering the true structure of metalanguage. Paradoxes arise when we presuppose a global layered structure for language. Metalanguage should not be considered as the upper layer of language, but rather as a defined topology on object language, which allows for a variety of hierarchical structures. In this more exact picture of metalanguage, Tarski's conception of truth must be construed as a local one, i.e. truth as a local predicate. This approach may shed some light on the less explored aspects of semantic paradoxes, especially Yablo's paradox. I will discuss that by considering a circular topology, a non-self-referential and non-paradoxical model can be obtained to locally attribute truth and falsehood to Yablo's expressions.

Two theories of the union of divine attributes with God by Sadr al-Din and the negation of attributes of God by Ibn-Arabi are two rival theories that still have many proponents. Imam Khomeini considered both theories to be valid and explained in his works.Leading research was based on a comparison of the ratio of the two theories and the search for the root of the difference between the two approaches with terminological and anthological considerations.

This research was qualitative and was done by analytical-descriptive method.

These two theories are in a correct proportion and in harmony with the rules and assumptions of her own intellectual system and due to the use of gradational unity of existence in the language of argument andpersonal unity of existence in expressing mystical experiences, both approaches are acceptable to Imam Khomeini.

  In the intellectual system of gradational existence, simple truth is the Necessary Being that is united with all possible levels and possesses the qualities of perfection inherently and absolutely, while On Personal Unity of Existence, Simple truth is the First issued that has all the possible attributes. Almighty Lord's attributes are substances of divine attributes which bears no resemblance to the possible attributes and like the unseen essence, are unknown and beyond the reach of human knowledge.

One of the aspects that has been referred to in the Transcendent Philosophy for attaining the knowledge of God through the knowledge of the soul is that the human soul is a supreme example of God. This means that God has created the human soul similar to Himself in terms of essence, attributes, and acts so that the knowledge of the soul could function as a means of attaining the knowledge of God in these three realms. However, it is noteworthy that God Almighty is pure from a like. Therefore, an example is different from a like. A careful study of Mullā Ṣadrā’s works reveals that he followed this theory seriously and tried his best to grant it a demonstrative nature. However, he never introduced it in a coherent and well-defined manner in a book or a chapter but dealt with its different dimensions in different chapters and works in relation to other discussions. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce this theory and the related interpretations in a coherent form. After some preliminary explanations regarding the Sadrian supreme example theory, this paper examines and analyzes the most important dimensions of the soul as an example of God and the related analyses in order to identify the most significant aspects of this feature of the human soul.