فصلنامه اندیشه دینی
پیاپی 80 (پاییز 1400)

Based on the principles including: 1. Separation of religion and religious knowledge, 2. General transformation in science, 3. General correlation between all branches of knowledge, 4. The susceptibility of religious knowledge to human knowledge, 5. Silence of Shari'a, 6 The effect of the interpreter's presuppositions on the text, etc. The theory of general transformation holds that there is no any fixed and everlasting religious perception.  Regarding viewpoints of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli and based on rational and analytic method, the present article has criticized the mentioned theory and its foundations. The lack of transformation in some scientific branches such as positive propositions, rational requirements, truth and falsity of scientific propositions, existence of degrading transformation along with evolutionary ones, lack of the effect of all Knowledge bodies on religious Knowledge, unjustified correlation and general transformation of human knowledge and consequently religious knowledge along with its internal contradiction, and eventually endorsing the rules governing the methodology of language are among focal factors in not accepting the general transformation of religious knowledge from the perspective of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, and in fact this theory leads to the" Knowledge replacement. "Additionally, the distinction between the nature of religion and the religious epistemology as well as inability to understand the truth of religion are other factors in rejecting the aforementioned theory.

ISIS is one of the religious extremists whose practical treatment of "others" is the result of the realization of three theoretical approaches in their thinking: First, they have closed their minds on other thoughts, so they do not pay attention to other views and approaches. Secondly, on the same basis, they reject any view or current that is inconsistent with their religious views.Third, their apocalyptic worldview.If these three be realized in any religious and thought current, it will lead to violent behaviors in the field of action and communication with others.This paper focuses on the social and political development of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, explores  the notion of worldview analysis in general and  as applied to this movement and determines that there are at least three different kinds of worldviews related to groups of followers who may survive, in different ways. Also, this paper is bridged between Sociology and Theology then reached a new Sociotheological reading about ISIS.   We were able to analyze this form of Islamic extremism as a thought and extract three different worldviews as social theology from the heart of this movement.

The issue of monotheism or dualism of Zoroastrians is one of the most challenging issues in Zoroastrianism. Monotheism, i.e knowing or considering God as one, has levels and manifestations such as monotheism in the necessity of existence, creation, worship, lordship, and so on. Mentioning the levels and manifestations of monotheism is very important in the present discussion; because most of the writers who have researched the subject of monotheism in Zoroastrianism have not clarified which of the levels of monotheism is considered as a criterion. On the one hand, this has led to various and even contradictory views, and on the other hand, it has led to the denial of Zoroastrian writers. The leading article by using an analytical-critical method and referring to Zoroastrian scriptures including Gahan is dedicated to the discussion of three levels of monotheism: monotheism in the necessity of existence, the creation and the worship, and finally shows that it is difficult in Zoroastrianism to accept monotheism in all its levels. for example, we can refer to monotheism in creation, which is denied in Zoroastrianism.

Investigating the commentary of Ibn Sina and Mirdamad on the expression of meanings and referents of Dahr (meta-time or aeviternity) and Sarmad (eternity or no time), it is known that Ibn Sina has given five meanings and four referents for the term Dahr, and two meanings and four referents for the term Sarmad, which sometimes contradict each other. However, this difference in interpretations can indicate the development and generalization of these two terms. Ibn Sina has stated two special features for the world of Dahr and two special features for the world of Sarmad and finally two common features between these two worlds.Mirdamad has used two innovative interpretations about the world of Dahr and has introduced two referents and three specific features for the world of Dahr. Following this commentary, he has given a referent and a special attribute for the world of Sarmad.Mulla Sadra has stated three meanings and seven referents for Dahr, and four referents for Sarmad.This article, while historical looking at this issue with an analytical-comparative method, first explains Ibn Sina's point of view and then tries to explain the approach of Mirdamad and Mulla Sadra, and finally, a comparative study of the views of these philosophers has been done.This difference in interpretation can be an indication of the efforts of these three philosophers to provide a true interpretation of these two terms, in comparison with the different levels of the universe and express their view of the universe.The purpose of this article is to explain and analyze how evolution occurs in these concepts. This can help us to understand the Intellectual foundations of the philosophers.

The relationship between knowledge and dreaming is considered to be as a main idea of Carlos Castaneda. Based on this theory, he claims that one can conceive knowledge in two ways: first, the knowledge which its objects are material and worldly matters and second, genuine knowledge which is attained in an unnatural state and possesses a non-empirical essence. In this case, dreaming is a situation in which genuine knowledge is obtained and hallucinogenic plants are also a means of realizing this kind of awareness. Apparently, the result of the critical analysis of Castaneda’s view is that his view are not sufficiently coherent; If transcendental knowledge is obtained through the dual domains of human existence, and happiness is also obtained through responding to the mental and physical needs and the realization of material and mental capabilities, can be said Castaneda does not present a precise explanation of the nature of blissful or transcendent knowledge. He only suffices with the claim that non-sensory knowledge or knowledge that arises from intangible things confirms transcendence. On the other hand, genuine knowledge in Castaneda's thought is a kind of awareness realized in the " unnatural state." This knowledge, which is considered as a form of spiritual intuition, is not based on the strengthening of the psychic powers. in reality, gaining knowledge through the use of hallucinogenic plants confirms this claim.
 
.

Investigations about time have been central to metaphysical inquiries. J.M.E McTaggart, the English philosopher of the early 20th century, argued for the unreality of time. He constructed two conceptual frameworks: A-series – “past”, “present” and “future” being its main concepts – and B-series – “earlier”, “simultaneous” and “later” being its main concepts – and asserted that time being real requires events to form an A-series. McTaggart, then, argued that a vicious circle or regress is inherent in the A-series. McTaggart’s paradox is the contradiction appearing in each step of the regress. As McTaggart’s paradox has been the subject of different (mis)interpretations, this article presents a new exposition of its structure by employing formal tools of modern temporal logic. The assumption that the series A is real, leads to a contradiction between different temporal descriptions of a single event. Tense operators are applied to demonstrate how a vicious infinite regress would entail the A-series. McTaggart’s paradox has invoked much controversy and a relevant worthwhile categorization is the second main contribution of this article. Some of those believing in the reality of time has denied the paradox’s alleged regress. Others among them have declared the paradox genuine, though resorted to the B-series for the reality of time. Meanwhile, some others have accepted McTaggart’s argument in its totality, with the conclusion of the unreality of time. Each camp is led by major philosophers, and their heated discussions on McTaggart’s paradox are still continuing.