The Dialectical Mutual Influence of Definition and Argument

In proving any thing, it must first be clarified by what definition you are trying to prove that thing. The arguer must have a minimum sure definition that separates the assumed thing from other things and essences. For example, if the reliable and minimal definition of the thing "A" is not clear, an opponent with the falsification of thing close to the thing "A" can claim the falsification of the existence of the thing "A". So, in the process of proving or disproving the existence of a thing, it is necessary to have a reliable and minimal definition that at least separates the desired thing from its alternatives, so that we do not get caught up in the mentioned problems in the position of proving the existence of a thing. Therefore, having a definition of a fact is effective, but necessary, in concluding an argument for its existence. On the other hand, in presenting the definition of a fact, care must be taken in choosing the components of the definition so that something is proposed as the component of the definition that definitely has a real role in concluding the assumed truth; That is, the components of the definition should be such that their components are definite and certain in relation to that truth; It means that the involvement of any component in the conclusion of the truth is assumed or self-evident, or it be certain by citing to argument; Otherwise, the definition will be wrong or imprecise, and existence or non-existence of the supposed truth remains unknown and will be faced with ambiguities; This makes it clear to us what components should be considered in order to know its truth, so that it only conforms to its real examples and not to its variations; So the proof of the existence of a truth is also involved in obtaining the definition of that truth or improving that definition.

Method of Study: 

The method of discovery in this issue is library method and the method of evaluation is rational analytic.

Here, it should be said that "the definition of any truth" and "the proof of its existence" each influence the other in some way, and there is a mutual relationship between the definition of a truth and the proof of its existence; In such a way that each one can help us to reach the other, and it is probably based on this mutual influence that in Islamic philosophy, philosophers like Ibn Sina and Suhrvardi believe in the problem of shared definition and proof; Because what is desired in the definition of something is discovering the truth of that thing, and the proof of the existence of that truth can provide this desire for the seeker; That is, the seeker can discover and extract the truth of something - in a limited or official form - considering that the proof specifies where the supposed truth is realized and where its example exists; On the contrary, it is desirable in the proof to reach the certainty of proving the truth, and the definition of the truth of something can provide this desire for the seeker; That is, by referring to the components of the definition of something, the seeker can obtain the middle limit that is positive for the existence of something, and based on that, get a convincing argument for the existence of something; Therefore, what has been proposed in Islamic philosophy and logic under the name of the sharing of term and argument, is an example of this mutual and dialectical influence of term and argument.

Conclusion :

Due to the mutual relationship between "defining" and "argument of its existence", each one causes a kind of improvement in the other. Considering this interrelationship, in this article we first defined God with the minimal definition of "supreme existence". This definition led to the extraction of arguments to prove God, and the result of this argument led to the formation of a more precise definition for God: the definition of God as "the Necessary Being". This more accurate definition led to the formation of better arguments to prove the existence of God, from which more theological results are extracted. Then these arguments led to the formation of a more precise definition for God, which is the definition of God as "the non-conditioned truth", and this more precise definition led to the formation of better arguments to prove the existence of God, from which more theological results are extracted: God is the only true Being and everything that is visible to us is a manifestation of his unique existence.