نشریه هستی و شناخت (نامه مفید)
سال پنجم شماره 2 (پیاپی 10، پاییز و زمستان 1397)

Philosophy studies the properties of being in a rational way, this is referred to as rational ontology. Religion on the other hand, one can clearly see with a basic review of Qur'an and hadith that part of their discourse relates to being and the universe and as such this is referred to as religious ontology. We find that religion and philosophy share a common discourse (i.e. ontology), the question then arises, how did Islamic Philosophers deal with this aspect of religious thought? To answer this question, I tried to make a reciprocal relationship between philosophical and religious thought. In this paper, I will bring evidence of religious concepts that are discussed philosophically, and I'll show that except for «the state of judgment», more or less religious thoughts are used in philosophy. Philosophy studies the properties of being in a rational way, this is referred to as rational ontology. Religion on the other hand, one can clearly see with a basic review of Qur'an and hadith that part of their discourse relates to being and the universe and as such this is referred to as religious ontology.

In Gottlub Frege's theory of the meaning of particular names and his descriptions of the meaning-making process of that, and subsequently, the process of conformation and fixing the references through the proposed meaning, Kripke introduces criticism. By misrepresenting the dual processes of Frege's theory, and consequently Russell's, Kripke argues that this theory is ineffective and misleading.My main purpose is to discuss Kripke's most important description of the theory, which is reflected in "naming and necessity" and to challenge Kripke's critique. Accordingly, I believed that Kripke's criticism of Frege for the confusion between the two processes of fixing and meaning-making in a sense in the theory is incorrect, and Kripke created this view and mistakenly attributes this idea to Frege at first. Actually, Kripke made this idea for Frege and from his theories in Sence and Reference. But Frege never mentioned this misleading in the process of fixing the sense for the references. Kripke after this creation began to critique on Frege in this.For this conclusion, we first need to explain Frege's theory of meaning and then we will research in terms of two processes of references and meaning fixation. This article claims that the two cannot be traced in the Frege's views, and Kripke has not used sufficient precision, deliberately or inadvertently, in his description of this theory.

In this paper we are trying to enlighten Corbin's phenomenology by a comparative approach and considering the relations of Corbin's basic problems of phenomenology i.e. " consciousness ","being ","time" and "phenomenology as a method" and those of traditional phenomenology(Husserl and Heidegger). So doing, we will speak of these problems' history in traditional phenomenology and then investigate Corbin's insights in these problems. The conclusion of this comparative approach is clarifying the differences between the two. So it can be said that Corbin's phenomenology is in nature different from what is called phenomenology. In other word its theological schema is so heavy that Corbin's "Tawil" can be hardly same as phenomenology. What is coming is an investigation in the relationships of these problems and what we know about phenomenological tradition.

One of the most challenging topics in logic knowledge, it is phenomenon of proposition in which the predicate is negative (salebahtul-mahmul), so that logicians have been divided into two groups in accepting this proposition and even the group that has accepted the existence of this proposition has not spoken the same about its meaning. It seems that Afzaluddin Khonji is the first logician to mention this proposition and, of course, regardless of the probable challenges of the salebahtul-mahmul, he has made its existence certain and has stated its rules in detail like other propositions. After Khonji, Athir al-Din Abhari designed the salebahtul-mahamul, but his argument for proving this proposition is opposed by Khajeh Tusi. Both Abhari's argument and Tusi's critique have found followers, and In addition, there is another argument for proving the salebahtul-mahmul proposition, which has been criticized by others. This article focuses on two important issues regarding the logical structure and meaning of the salebahtul-mahmul and review the statements made in these two issues, show that there is no solid reason to prove the salebahtul-mahmul and the problems with this proposition are stronger than the proofs.

Negative theology an important and popular view in the field of "language of religion" is among Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologians.Negative theology is discussed in three sections: ontology, epistemology, and semantics of divine attributes there is a close connection between them. Plato in the field of Christian theology and Judge Saeed in the field of Islamic theology and Imami thinkers have a high position among the followers of negative theology. Through this research, it becomes clear that in Plotinus' thought, the "unit" is transcendental, and all positive attributes are related to "existence"; Therefore, in the case of the unit, we must remove these attributes from him. Judge Saeed, while criticizing the positive theology of excess and objectivity, has proved the negative theology in the shadow of religious culture and rational arguments. Negative theology in these two perspectives, in addition to their commonalities and differences, also has shortcomings that the present article addresses.

Heidegger in the book he The Way of Language change his intellectual position from foundmental ontology to more original means talk about essence of language. This essay shows how can language understand its internal foundations by itself? Heidegger return to language original situation means Ereignis. Heidegger says Ereignis is deriving force that change silence of language to speech. Language shows himself by speech and talk to himself. In the other hand, Ereignis all of beings in the special situation with hermeneutic relationships with Dasein and the world. In Gadamer’s thought, indirectly Ereignis determined form of dialogue between interpreter and text. Take it possibility two horizon that each other go to their horizon and reach a common situation. Thus according to Heidegger and Gadamer’s thought, Ereignis as opener hidden language text and interpreter provide a new interpretation from relation Dasien and being. There is a common horizontal between interpreter and text and to speak language as language to language.