فصلنامه آیین حکمت
پیاپی 37 (پاییز 1397)

foundationalists divide beliefs into two basic and non-basic groups and view the former as those not in need to other believes to be justified. Among the basic beliefs, intuitive beliefs have a very stable position and are known as one of the valid principles of knowledge. While maximal rationalists like Descartes consider intuitive beliefs as infallible, moderate rationalists such as Laurence BonJor have viewed them as fallibale. In his explanation of how to justify this type of beliefs, BonJour presents his theory of constitutive awareness. As viewed by him, constitutive awareness is a non-conceptual state which turn into intuitive belief through a descriptive process. Among contemporary Muslim philosophers, Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi has viewed intuitive beliefs as being directly perceived and, therefore, infallible. This paper, with an analytical approach, attempts to explain the viewpoint of Ayatullah Mesbah Yazdi, as a Muslim foundationalist, and Bunjur, as a Western foundationalist, in the field, and answer the objections proposed by western philosophers against infallibility of intuitive beliefs on the basis of Islamic philosophy.

As Muslim mystics, including Imam Khomeini, have viewed, the creation and the direction of the universe are due to God`s manifestations and reflections of various names and attributes. The present paper, intending to explain the creation and the direction of the universe from Imam Khomeini's point of view with a descriptive-analytical method, has studied Imam`s view as understood from his mystical principles. The theory of huduthi ismi given by Mulla Hadi Sabzevari, is one of the theories on huduth and qidami of the universe. Pre-existent modes, quiddities, of the contingents are found in the third determination following wahidiyyat and Divine order of Names and Attributes. In this paper, the creation and the direction of the universe on the basis of the theory of huduthi ismi it has been proved that God, presenting Himself by the Name of the "Creator," has created the universe; that is, the universe is created by a Divine Name. Therefore, whatever happens in the natural world, surely it is a manifestation of the Divine Names. The universe has begun with the Divine Name "Rabb" and, therefore, the basis and foundation of the universe is God's Name. For this reason, any entity, other than the perfect man, is in the realm of Divine Particular Name called Rabb by Which God direct the entity

Belief in raj`at and disbelief in reincarnation is one of Shiite important issues in theology. However, some Sunni scholars have falsely conceived that Shi`ah has viewed the two teachings to be identical and, thereof, attributed rationality of reincarnation to Shi`ah and opposed raj`at. But such an attribution is clearly false. The main question posed by this study, then, is: what is the difference between raj`at and reincarnation in Shiism? The response of the question, with a fair approach, will show that how Shi'ite teaching of raj`at differs from that of reincarnation. Research findings make it clear that these two concepts are different, raj`at is reasonable and accepted, while reincarnation is not reasonable. In this article, an attempt has been made to study the sources of this false judgment at first and then, argue for raj`at and against reincarnation. The method of the study is a descriptive and analytical one

The problem of "rationality of religious belief" has attracted the attention of religious scholars, especially the philosophers of religion. The historical starting-point of this question, especially "rationality of belief in God", lies in the West. Appearance of challenges against the fundamental concepts of religion, along with the failure of some philosophical concepts, made the ground ready for disputations about rational validity of religious beliefs. may a religious belief, particularly belief in God, be essentially reasonable, or the belief should be explained on the basis of another one? In response to this question, many efforts have been made by Western philosophers like Plantinga who religion has been one of their main concerns in philosophy and by Muslim philosophers like Allameh Tabataba'i. In the paper, it has been intended to study subject comparatively and present the reasons and the type of rationality of the two philosophers. In this paper, the subject has been studied with a comparison made between Allameh and Plantinga with a descriptive and analytical method. First part of the paper has focused on Plantinga`s responses to objections and critiques and the second to Allameh and his considerations in the field. And finally a comparison has been maded between them as the conclusion

Lack of proper understanding of the similarity between God and creature has raised objections by the opponents. All the objections may be summarized in this fundamental question as: how is such a similarity between God and creation that does not lead to His likeness to creatures? As explained analytically in the paper, the caused being`s descending from its cause, as one principle of similarity, happens in the case of agents and their caused beings not in the case of natural causes and there may not be found any likeness between God and natural causes. In addition, He is distinguished from other existential causes by His particular existential intensity. It should be stated, therefore, that such a particular similarity does not lead contingent beings to necessary being and to multiplicity of necessary being. Since existence is not like quiddity to keep its essences in all of its extensions. The philosophical rulr saying the giver may not lack what gives to things, includes such agent of will as God, though God`s possession of being is true and the highest one. It should be mentioned that neither God`s similarity to creatures leads to its being combined nor its difference with them. Since the two state originate from existence as one reality

Moral proofs of the existence of God, being made from some preliminaries with the content of experience and moral thought, are distinguished from practical and theoretical ethical proofs. Some, like Kant, emphasizing that morality is essentially a rationally necessary function, emphasize the need for a moral principle in the universe and claim that one has to accept the existence of God by virtue of necessitating state of moral values. While, critics have viewed the proof incapable to prove God's external existence. Therefore, relying on the objectivity of moral values, some have provided a theoretical proof of the existence of God and it has become more accepted. In the proof, it is claimed that human ethical behaviors in different periods have been based on the existence of a set of universal and objective moral values, ruling all over the world, that their reasonability is limited to the existence of a unique God. Some Other have essentially focused on the religious nature of moral obligation and motivation, they believe that, with the exception of God and his commands, no power can evoke human being to do moral deeds. In the present article, various narrations of this proof are studied and criticized. It is finally concluded that although this proof lacks an interconnected harmony, regarding its effect in other proofs in the field, it is notable

The problem of right is known as one of the important issues in human moral, legal and political life and today, the claim of being of right in its widest level rules. Various rights are claimed in various areas of family, community and universe and some of them, like human rights, are claimed to be natural. But, if such widespread claims have a rational basis, or anyone may claim the right, should be studied. As is clear, agreeing the second part of the question, human social life would be exposed to chaos and various damages. The first part, then, is regarded as the place of dispute for the thinkers in the field of philosophy is right. May one consider God as the basis of human natural rights or human need, human nature and ...? In this paper, we some important views in the field have studied and, finally, the preferred view (natural possessing) is presented