نشریه فلسفه تحلیلی
پیاپی 24 (پاییز و زمستان 1392)

In this article Descartes philosophy is considered from on ethical point of view. At first the importance of morality in the big picture of his philosophy is demonstrated. Descartes is introduced as a sage whose philosophy is first of all an ethical and therapeutic one. We have considered Descartes similarities with Stoics and explored the most practical aspects of his philosophy illustrated in his letters especially. After that, two important passions in Descartes' ethics are clarified, i.e., generosity and love. At the end we have emphasized that – against some current conceptions about Descartes philosophy – his deepest and most ultimate concerns were about some ancient ideas such as good life, ethics, and wisdom.

The discussion about the primacy of either ethics or epistemology and their relation in Kant’s philosophy has a long history. Any argument in this regard, rests inevitably its foundations upon one of these fields and interprets the other one on the basis of those foundations. Richard Kroner, like other neo-Kantian commentators of the Heidelberg school, understands the Kantian philosophy as a whole which is more a weltanschauung, rather than a closed system like the Hegel’s, in which ethics is prior to epistemology and the practical is superior to the theoretical. According to Kroner’s interpretation, epistemology itself is ethical in essence, and the activity of the reason is a moral action as well. In his interpretation, however, neither ethics nor epistemology fades in favor the other one. According to him, Kant’s Weltanschauung is based on the constant tension between two poles none of which will fade away into the other one. Their contrast is in fact the engine of the struggle of the moral will. Epistemology and ethics are faced with each other on the basis of this very Kantian dialectic. In the present article, I am going to analyze Kroner’s interpretation of Kant’s Weltanschauung and his main theses in his Kant’s Weltanschauung. I will show the status of morality in the Kantian System and explain the relation between epistemology and ethics in this system on the basis of the preliminaries provided by Kroner.

Kuhn often accused that has repeated the foundations of relativism in a cover and surface of scientific history in his works especially in Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The impossibility of reaching the truth, undedetermination of theories by observations and incommonsuribility are the main foundations of relativism which is found in Kuhn’s works. But Kuhn did not consider himself as a relativist. In response to this accusation he emphasis the existence of common sensory stimulants and discuss a list of common values that can guarantee the objectivity and rationality of science. He also defined incommensuribility in a moderate way which is equal to the impossibility of complete and accurate translation. This essay will review Kuhn’s response to this accusation and will show that though Kuhn in his second period of thought use a more realistic language but he defined its concepts in a relativistic paradigm and foundations of relativism are still present.

Friedrich Nietzsche is a philosopher who speaks repeatedly about death and addresses specifically the "Voluntary death" in his works. It Also can be inferred from some of his sentences that he directly invites  human to choose death .This invitation isn’t equal with denying  life (as Schopenhauer presents), but arises as a result of mixing it with other newfound ideas, such as the "Will to power" or the "Overman". The Overman, as a light of hope that shines on Nietzsche’s regarded humanity is an excellent example for the will to power and acceptance of the "Eternal return" theory in the world. For this purpose, in this article, we should talk about Overman in related with voluntary death, to understand his criticisms of those beliefs that represent the negation of life. According to Nietzsche, "Preachers of death" are those who consider just one dimension (suffering) ;while thinking about death will be valued if it is in perfect harmony with thinking about life. However, at the end, we will see his statements are not sufficient and he failed to draw one obvious and practical way for this harmony .So after him, also, thinking about the meaninglessness of life and suicide as the logical result extends the experience of absurdity.

The present paper is intended to examine the two criticisms raised against William Rowe's evidential argument. The common aspect between these two criticisms is that, both of them are built on the concept of "complexity". The first one is Kirk Durston’s, which refers to the complex intertwined historical combination of numerous accidents and events and attempts to prove that ignorance of the good related to some evils is due to the complexity of historical events and it does not mean that such evils are exorbitant as it is stated by William Rowe. The second criticism that, proposed by Daniel Howard Schneider, emphasizes, by expounding the concept of complex good, on the point that the mysteriousness of some good prevents their full recognition by the human cognitive faculty and consequently, would seems as if some of the evils in the world have no good end.

The question of faith is one of the main concerns for Kierkegaard. How can human being gain to a genuine and reliable faith? Can be found to believe in God through argument and reasoning? Does the direct connection is only way to communicate with God and become faithful? All of these are the most important issues that had been preoccupying Kierkegaard’s mind. Kierkegaard believes that the only way to communicate with God and become faithful is direct contact and devotion to God. The aim of this paper is to criticize and evaluate Kierkegaard’s view on this field.