فصلنامه ذهن
سال بیست و سوم شماره 3 (پیاپی 91، پاییز 1401)

Cognitive science is a modern and interdisciplinary science that, along with nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, forms the convergent knowledge complex (NBIC). Theology is a science that deals with deriving, regulating and explaining religious knowledge and concepts And proves and justifies the propositions of faith with various methods of reasoning, including arguments, debates, speeches, etc., and answers the objections and doubts of the opponents of religion. Some issues have been raised in the scientific sciences that challenge some theological issues. Since theology is responsible for explaining and defending the revelation and theological teachings, it is necessary to enter these topics. On the one hand, if faced with a lack of knowledge, theology should complete itself, and on the other hand, with its constructive criticism, clarify the deficiency of the cognitive sciences and complement these sciences.

Method of Study: 

The upcoming article intends to deal with the types of relationship between cognitive sciences and speech with the library method in collecting information and the analytical descriptive method in deriving the point of view.

The findings of this research are as follows: 1. Sciences can appear in two conflicting and cooperative roles in relation to each other. For the cooperative role, it is possible to depict various types of relationships based on the elements and components of science. These relationships can be divided into three content, method and model relationships. 2. Content relationship can be propositional and basic, and each can be divided into three types: production and consumption relationship, dialogic relationship, and cohesive, corrective, and deepening relationship. 3. The content relationship between cognitive sciences and theologycan be depicted in the three fields of theology, religion and anthropology. a. Things like proof, description of God and definition of divine names and attributes are related to the first area. b. Matters such as revelation and religious experience, the relationship between science and religion, and the functions of religion are related to the second area. c. Matters such as the problem of mind and body, the problem of artificial intelligence, the unity of human wisdom and natural affairs, as well as free will are common areas of content in the third area. 4. Cognitive science by using experimental method in the field of cognitive studies is effective in correcting and completing and deepening theological topics. 5. Due to the use of multiple methods by theology, it is possible to mention the methodological unity of this science with the cognitive sciences, while theology uses other methods that the cognitive sciences do not use, and for this reason, it can help the theories of the cognitive sciences. 6. Sometimes the relationship between two things is a structural relationship, for example, the relationship between the Qur'an and Islamic thought can be content and structural. The structural relation is the same as the model relation. 7. Based on the discussions of conceptual metaphor in cognitive sciences, it is claimed that the Qur'an as a text that theologians use and are responsible for defending has used this model. Paying attention to this model has many effects in the field of theological debates, including the knowledge of God, existential monotheism, and Islamic cosmology and worldview, and it can make judgments about theological sects and religions.

Undoubtedly, there are relations between sciences. In this article, it was clarified that there are three relationships between cognitive science and theology: content, method, and model creation. The content relation can be propositional and principled, that is, the relation in the content is sometimes related to the presuppositions and fields of science and sometimes it is related to the propositions that are present in the scene of science. The model relationship is related to the structure and has nothing to do with the content.

This article discusses about one of the most difficult and the most challenging problems in the theory of knowledge. It should be noticed that this problem is not about whether knowledge has criterion or not, but it concerns with this puzzle that if knowledge should have a criterion, then what is the criterion of the criterion? or by what criterion, a criterion should be chosen? In fact, the position of challenge would be the problem of the criterion of the criterion. Really, it can be said that this problem is the main challenge between sceptics and anti-sceptics. Hence, it has been known as a metaepistemological problem in the contemporary epistemology, because it differs substantially from other epistemological problems in the epistemology. This problem has two versions: classic version and modern version. The classic version of this problem has been related to Sextus Empiricus (Empiricist, belonged to the Empirical School of Medicine), the author of Outlines of Scepticism. He was a pyrrhonist philosopher, a physician and a pyrrhonian skeptic living probably in the second or third century. Many of whose works survive, including the Outlines of Pyrrhonism, the best and the fullest account of Pyrrhonian skepticism (a kind of skepticism named for Pyrrho). Pyrrhonian skepticism involves having no beliefs about philosophical, scientific, or theoretical matters.

Method of Study: 

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

Whereas modern skepticism questions the possibility of knowledge, Pyrrhonian skepticism questions the rationality of belief. Now, the classic version of the problem will be discussed by analytic and comparative method in this essay. Finally, we come to this conclusion that this problem is really a fallacy, that is a dilemma fallacy, and it can be solved by analysing the self-evident foundations of knowing.

" Dilemma fallacy" is some kind of fallacy which shows decisively that there are only two ways for getting something and all of the ways are unacceptable. sceptics use this kind of fallacy and claim that we can have knowledge, if we have reason but the process of reasoning finally comes to circle or vicious regress. So, we cannot have knowledge at all. But this is a fallacy, because the process of knowing is not limited to the process of reasoning. Actually, having knowledge comes from two ways: the way of self-evidence and the way of reasoning. Hence, we can pass from two horns of this dilemma fallacy and come to knowledge without circular and vicious regress. A well-known example for this dilemma fallacy is that a Greek mother said to his child " Do not be a politician, because you will tell truth in politics or lie. Now, if you tell truth as a politician, certainly God will be satisfied of you. But people would hate you. Otherwise, if you lie as a politician, God will become angry of you, but people would be satisfied of you. Therefore, you should escape from politics as much as possible. It worth mentioning that sceptics use this kind of fallacy and say: you have knowledge if you give reason, but giving reason leads to circle or vicious regress. So, you cannot know anything; the main claim of scepticism. But it is clear without saying that this claim is really a dilemma fallacy, because taking knowledge is not limited in the way of reasoning, but knowledge, as a true justified belief, comes from self-evidence and reason(argument). So, from this way, we can pass from two horns of this fallacy and come to knowledge without circular and vicious regress.

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.

Division into concept and Judgement is one of the famous divisions of the acquired knowledge. Among Islamic thinkers, the discussion of this division can be traced back to Farabi's words. After him, other Muslim logicians and philosophers paid attention to this debate and discussed it in their books. The discussion about this has also provoked differences that Mulla Sadra addressed in the treatise of concept and Judgement. In fact, in each of these views, attention has been paid to an aspect of the aspects of Judgement. Some have considered Judgement to be equal to the proposition, some have introduced its truth as an attribution, and some have considered it as a concept that accompanies the attribution. Another point of view that has been presented about the truth of Judgement is related to those who have considered it as understanding the truth of the proposition. With the investigations we have done in the article, we have shown that all these views have problems and each of them has only paid attention to one aspect of the various aspects of Judgement, and this has caused confusion in the definition of Judgement. Mulla Sadra acknowledged more attention to different dimensions of Judgement, so sometimes he called it a belief (a kind of tendency) and sometimes he called it a concept, which is the same as an attribution. It is better to combine these three and consider each of the meanings of "belief", "concept" and " attribution" as referring to one aspect of Judgement. The interpretation of "concept" refers to the epistemic aspect, the interpretation of "belief" refers to the tendentious aspect, and the interpretation of "attribution" refers to the active aspect of Judgement.

Methods of Study: 

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

To put it more clearly and based on the selected point of view, Judgement is a multi-faceted reality, and it can be acknowledged that these definitions are in fact mentioning different dimensions of Judgement, and Judgement is one of the things which has different aspects in harmony with the self, and this is the characteristic that distinguishes it from concept and at the same time makes Judgement a part of the types of knowledge.

Therefore, the Judgement of a truth is three-faceted, which is an epistemic passivity on the one hand, a dispositional passivity on the other hand, and the third face, which observes the active face of the self, is the verb of the self. The first aspect makes us consider Judgement as a type of concept. The second aspect has caused some people to consider it as a kind of acknowledgment and confession that is achieved passively for humans and has a tendency aspect. Sometimes, the expression of faith and belief is used to refer to this aspect, and finally, the third aspect has caused many logicians and philosophers to call Judgement the same as attribution or to call it a concept that accompanies the attribution. In fact, all of these are different aspects of the same truth, and by combining them (epistemic passivity, dispositional passivity, and active aspect), the truth of Judgement is confirmed and its distinction from concept is revealed. The last word is that what has been collected in this article is a library review of the views and their rational and philosophical analysis to lead to the selected theory which is the multifaceted nature of Judgement

The cognitive dimension of man is expressed in the Qur'an with various concepts such as: knowledge, wisdom, thought, jurisprudence, poetry, sense, opinion, suspicion, lip, certainty, rationality, deliberation, contemplation, knowledge, wisdom, etc. Understanding the stages of formation of knowledge in humans is one of the issues whose correct understanding, in addition to knowledge, also helps to improve knowledge; Teaching and learning, in addition to the independent subject of human excellence, are the introduction to increasing faith and righteous deeds.

Method of Study: 

The research method used in this article is a research in the field of analytical-descriptive and library-type research, where the information collected through content analysis has been analyzed and descriptively analyzed the ten stages of human knowledge with an approach to verses and traditions.

The first stage of cognition takes place in the structure of "intelligence". In the process of reasoning, by receiving "knowledge" as a cognitive content, science becomes knowledge. The knowledge absorbed by the intellect is established in the structure of "dream". "Thinking" is a process that uses stored information to be used in the next step. "Dhikr" deals with recalling the knowledge stored in the heart. "Jurisprudence" transforms the information stored in the heart into faith with the help of desire. "Certainty", the evolved stage of faith, which in a new structure of the self, becomes wisdom. "Wisdom" is the result of the process of all intellectual and heart matters that are available to the soul to realize action.

The adaptation and transformation of wisdom with the truths of the world is one of the other functions created by the soul to connect the results obtained from human science with the truths of pure divine knowledge, which is created in the "truth" stage. In this article, we intend to examine the ten stages of human knowledge based on the verses of the Qur'an and the traditions of the infallible imams (a.s.) do.

The apparent (zahir) senses are the first means of encountering and perceptual communication with sensations, and sensory perception is the first stage of the process of acquiring knowledge from the environment for humans as a subject. This stage is known in epistemological sources as a condition for the realization of other sciences in the next stages. Also, a large share of cognitive psychology research is dedicated to this field. But regarding the function of the senses, as perceptive. Both cognitive psychology, as a relatively young science, and the modern epistemology, as a new approach derived from Islamic philosophy, have presented analyzes in this regard.

The research method in the cognitive psychology is based on empirical appearance; But in practical terms, the presented analyzes are performed by using the ability to analyze and transform ideas into propositions and transform propositions into theories by inner perceptive powers, especially reason. On the other hand, NeoSadraei’s epistemology uses the method of intellectual analysis that observes the phenomena that occur in the realm of the apparent senses. Therefore, there is a common area between the two sciences in the research method. By referring to the written sources of the two mentioned sciences, focusing on the problem of the realization process of sensory perception, this research tries to obtain the views of the two sciences regarding the process of realization of sensory perception and present them after comparing and matching the common issues and differences between these two approaches. Both sciences consider sensory perception as the reality indicating the environment and sensations; but there are differences in explaining the function of components and its process.

The research carried out led to the conclusion that NeoSadraei’s epistemology, in explaining the process of sensory perception, introduces the apparent senses as the agent under the command of "soul" as the main manager and user of the process of perception, and cognitive psychology tries, the process of realization of perception, cognition and sensory recognition to the function of cognitive tools in the experimental dimension. Neo-Sadraei’s epistemology did not independently and comprehensively deal with the aspect of experimental and laboratory functions of body parts (external organs, nerves and brain); However, it has provided a diagram of the connection and interaction of physical and metaphysical principles in the process of realizing all kinds of knowledge, including sensory perception; But cognitive psychology, while paying careful attention to the senses and organs and perceptual parts of the body and presenting the functions of the external senses and physical organs and significant achievements in this aspect, analyzing and drawing the relationship between sensory aspects and extrasensory aspects and factors, in the process of realization of cognitions; including sensory perceptions, did not present or stopped at this stage.

The result is that Neo-Sadraei’s epistemology in the realm of attention and precision in the material performance of perceptual tools, especially the apparent senses that are directly related to sensations, needs to complete the discussions and add the findings to the product of its previous traditional research, and on the other hand, cognitive psychology needs going beyond the material realm and the scope of the analyzes focused on the material aspect of mere perceptual tools, including the visual senses, in order to study more commonalities in order to reveal the details of the process with a more accurate and joint use of the findings and important common questions that can be investigated between these two sciences. It is necessary to realize all kinds of knowledge for the study of harmony and the discovery of new horizons.

Among the letters, prepositions have a special place because they connect the verb and the noun in the sentence.Furthermore, understanding the relationship between the verb and the noun depends on the precise knowledge of prepositions and familiarity with their diverse nature and functions. Through the semantic analysis, the role of the movement schema of prepositions in the construction of abstract meanings is found.It also contributes to answer the crucial question of how the path schema of prepositions helps to clarify the meanings and expands them in the verses of the Qur'an. Apart from this, vowels are among the grammatical words and their importance in depicting and establishing semantic and structural relationships in the language of the Qur'an shows the importance of research in this linguistic category.

Method of Study:

 In the present study, the descriptive-analytical study method was used to explain the findings.

In semantic research, visual schemas are very important; Because they have an abstract structure and through them, you can bridge from concrete experiences to cognitive fields. Among Johnson's three visual schemas (Containment, Path and Force), the movement schema has the highest frequency. The results of the examination of the word of revelation, which is a total of 6236 verses, show that about 1311 cases of the mission of conceptualization were carried out through the movement schema, which had the highest frequency. Based on most of the analyzed verses, it can be said that the movement plan is a part of the super plan of "life as a journey":moral and religious life from the perspective of the Qur'an, as walking on the right path and leaving bad and immoral lif. The inner movement of man, which leads from the world of matter to the realm of meaning goal (Meet God) by referring to words such as "darkness", "light", "path,""road", "way", "be guided", "Ascension", "falling", "regression", "destiny", "heaven" and "hell" and the purposefulness of human life and the need to move towards the goal (meeting the Lord of the worlds) are stated. The expressions in the Qur'an that conceptualize the way of moving and the path are:"ascend", "raise" "fall down ","get down","wake up","hurry up","striving", "came ","come out ".It seems that among the main components of movement, i.e.: movement component, path, body,background and path component, i.e.:origin(starting point), length of the path and destination (end point). The components of the path and the destination are more frequent in the concept of creation of events in the Qur'an, and the vowel preposition (min, ilá, ‘an) have a high-frequency movement function. The prepositions ‘min’ and "‘an " are origin oriented and the prepositions " ilá " and " ḥattá " are destination oriented.The adverbial preposition ‘lam’ is of the type of process scheme and the adverbial letter ‘ḥattá’ is temporal and destination-oriented.

In terms of its nature, the preposition has several states and its final meaning is determined by the situation in which the letter is used. path schema as the most frequent schema used in the adverbs contained in the Holy Quran, help to create image schemas of abstract meanings. In other words, through semantic analysis, it is possible to reveal the role of path schema of prepositions in the construction of abstract meanings and new semantic layers.

Common kind assumption indicates that veridical perception and hallucination are of a common fundamental kind. The causal argument is purported to support the assumption: since it is possible for the veridical perceptual experience and the hallucinatory experience to have a same proximal cause, these experiences belong to a common fundamental kind. In this respect, causal argument refutes disjunctivism. Disjunctivism is a theory of perception which strictly rejects common kind assumption. Martin endorses disjunctivism in order to save naïve realism (i.e. some of our perceptual experiences take ordinary mind-independent objects as their constituents). Martin tries to defend both disjunctivism and naïve realism against the causal argument.

I study the different versions of the causal argument. The argument relies upon the “same cause, same effect” principle. Externalism rejects the principle. But the principle could be revised to defend against externalism. The revised causal argument is a valid argument. I explain that the argument, although doesn’t conclude common kind assumption, but creates a problem for naïve realism. The revised causal argument entails that the common property between veridical perception and hallucination screens off naïve realism from delivering an explanation for veridical perceptual experience. Martin proposes a solution for the problem. The only common property between veridical perception and hallucination is that both of them are indiscriminable form veridical perception. To have a perceptual experience is to have a mental state which is not indiscriminable through reflection from veridical perception. The condition of indiscriminability is the necessary and sufficient condition for being a perceptual experience. Thus the common property which screens off naïve realism from giving an explanation is indiscriminability from veridical perception. Naïve realism would be rescued. But hallucinatory experiences could only have negative epistemological characteristics: being indiscriminable form veridical perceptual experiences. In addition, I study alternative solutions: Johnston’s and Fish’s. Then I survey the critical lines.

Martin’s solution is not justified. The indiscriminability condition is not the necessary and sufficient condition for being a perceptual experience. The ability to discriminate (or, to judge that two events are not-identical) is a high-order one. Some creatures with low-level cognitive capacities, e.g. dogs and infants, lack the ability. Thus, for these creatures, the indiscriminability condition meets trivially: all of their perceptual experiences have the same phenomenal character. This contradicts our ordinary intuition. Furthermore, I argue that Martin’s negative disjunctivism (i.e. disjunctivism with this negative commitment: the only positive mental characteristic of hallucinatory experiences is the negative epistemological one) is incompatible with empirical framework and findings. It seems that empirical evidences support the idea that hallucinatory experiences have positive characteristics. The evidences indicate that at least some of hallucinations are physiologically very similar to veridical perceptions. In addition, it appears that the negative thesis, in principle, couldn’t be one of the scientist’s hypotheses concerning the nature of hallucination. Lastly I claim that Martin’s solution couldn’t fit with common sense.

The initial causal argument is not conclusive. It rests on the “same cause, same effect” principle. The principle should be rejected, given the externalist view. Thus the initial causal argument couldn’t support the common kind assumption. But the revised causal argument, although doesn’t reject disjunctivism, but screens off naïve realism as an explanation of perceptual experience.