فصلنامه حکمت اسلامی
پیاپی 35 (زمستان 1401)

Advocates of logical theory of probability have answered the objections raised against the principle of indifference by the critics. John Maynard Keynes[1] and Shahid Sadr are two celebrated characters in this field. In this paper, the main issue is to comparatively study and criticize their views. Our aim is to pave the way for contemporary Muslim intellectuals to theorize in the field in the course of their dialogue with globally-known people of ideas. The method adopted is library-reference for collection of data and intellectual analysis and synthesis for the content.The result demonstrates that Sahid Sadr’s first self-evident principle in the explanation of probability theory is indeed the same as Keynes’ principle of indifference; both of them tried to clear main doubts through a strategy of subdivision. The majority or all the so-called contradictions have happened due to the ambiguity in the very issue of probability or in the improper application. In a nutshell, Shahid Sadr’s theory of probability has large capacities to deal with new challenges in this field. [1]- A British intelligent and prominent Economist who founded the logical theory of probability in economy (1946-1883).

As one true issue documented by the verses of the Qur’an and many traditions, general perception of all beings has called the attention of Muslim intellectuals.  Transcendent philosophy has taken valuable steps in the course of explanation of the presence of perception in all beings; however, the arguments for incorporeality of knowledge has proven a serious obstacle to the demonstration of such a claim.Having adopted a critical approach and a descriptive-analytic method, the authors went to show that those arguments fail to prove an obstacle to the claim. As per the findings, those arguments fail to prove that all kinds of knowledge are conditioned by incorporeality and thus they cannot be an obstacle to the general perception in all beings. When such rational obstacles are gone, we can resort to the revealed arguments for the general perception in all beings, although rational arguments for the claim are insufficient.

This paper deals with Farabi on the civic role of women including higher administrative posts even as a president. The presupposition is that position of women as political and social actors has always been challenging and provoking questions. The main question is “what is the civic personality of women?” As it were, what is the position and social and political role of women in a government and political system? The assumption is: “In Farabi’s political philosophy, women are political and social beings, who are qualified to play their active political role even at higher political management.” For more explanation of the assumption: probably, women’s delicate nature may cause many misunderstandings or even worse, historical misuse of them. As a result, due to their delicate nature, women have the competence to play a softer political role (rather than a rough or violate one); however, this must is in need of preparation of the ground. Method the analysis of the text and content of Farabi’s works and political views about women. It is noteworthy that al-Farabi is the greatest interpreter and founder of civic theosophy and Islamic political philosophy.

Viewing the fact that criteria for the efficiency of government are different in various political philosophies, the author has tried to study Khujwa Nasir Tusi’s view on the issue. More precisely, he aims to study Tusi’s criteria as per his particular approach to existence and perfection of man. The adopted method for the collection of data is library-reference and for processing is to analyze the content of descriptive and prescriptive propositions about man and the demands of man’s perfection in man’s civil life. The result is that in Khwja Nasir Tusi’s political philosophy, government’s efficiency is defined within the framework of civic moderation at two levels: 1- negatively preventive which restrains harms deviations and injustice, and 2-, positively preparing the ground for man’s moderation and transcendence giving rise to man’s material and spiritual, individual and social progress, and welfare and peace of man’s civic life.

The explanation how plurality of the world is issued from One Origin and the relation between plurality and unity have been one of the most challenging concerns of philosophers who proposed various explanations in their different schools of thought. Mulla Sadra has suggested his own particular viewpoint, too.     Having applied an analytic-descriptive method, the authors based their research on the assumption that Mulla Sadra’s explanation about the issue is different from that of many other philosophers. Mulla Sadra has explained the relation of concrete realities to Allah almighty through different keywords such as causality, manifestation, and modes (tasha’un). Their main aim is to draw a correct picture of issuance and to illustrate Mulla Sadra’s efforts in the course of his correct world-view based on his thoughts. The semantic explanation of plurality of the world from One Origin is one of findings of this paper.     Mulla Sadra has come up with two views standing in one line. In his first view and through the theory of gradation, Mulla Sadra considers the First Intellect as the first issued entity as the channel for other issued plurality. In his second and last view and along with mystics’ personal unity, he regards all other than Allah as the theophany from Him they are manifested all at once and that is the eExpanded eExistence and Breath of Clemency including all else than Him. Mulla Sadra, however, differs from mystics in that such theophany is stronger with Mulla Sadra but weaker and more shadowy with mystics.

Philosophy of law and that of politics are two close disciplines of knowledge which bear similarities in many issues. At first, one might ask whether they have any relation. If yes, what is it?Having adopted a descriptive-analytic method and library- reference, the author goes to study the relation between the two philosophies. Findings show that they share both in some principles and telos. There is a relation of generality and particularity in some respect between the issues of the two. Each of the two depends on another in some cases and makes use of its outcomes. Sometimes they have a common solution for some issues.

A posteriori argument is conditioned by the existence of creatures without which one cannot prove the existence of Allah. Avicenna’s account of seddiqin (ontological) argument is conditioned by the existence of “some thing” and by the division of existence into necessary and contingent beings. Mulla Sadra’s seddiqin argument is also conditioned by the primacy of existence, gradation of existence, and that the existence of effect is the very dependence on its cause, rather something depending on the cause. This is while, the existence of Allah is not conditioned by the existence of His creatures. Accordingly, were any of the above conditions denied or doubtful, it would be impossible to prove the existence of Allah. Nor is it possible were the form of argument invalid or doubtful, either. Now the question is: “Is it possible to mount an argument which is unconditioned by anything as His existence is absolutely unconditioned?” Allamah Tabatabaii’s account of seddiqin argument answers, yes. Despite denying all above conditions, his argument does not fail to prove the existence of Allah. This argument is not conditioned by anything, as is His existence absolutely unconditioned.

One might ask about the meaning of something, while the nature of meaning and how one is to get the meaning are the most complicated issues in the philosophy of language. Semantics influenced by empiricism is the most prevailing approach in contemporary Western philosophy. Accordingly, only those perceptions are regarded to carry any meaning that correspond to our sense impressions capable of experience. In his theory of use of language, Wittgenstein considers the meaning as a practical use of words. His theory has greatly influenced many fields of study particularly the philosophy of education.    Having adopted a critically descriptive-analytic method, the authors analyzed the nature of meaning in Wittgenstein’s theory of use of language and then they demonstrated the nature of meaning and language games in terms of family resemblance. Due to the dominance of behaviorism and empirical trait of language with Wittgenstein, language is prior to the mind and regarded as the criterion for having meaning. Consequently, his theory is open to objections such as, the denial of fundamental principles, the impossibility of the very theory, the preference of common reason, that meaning is exclusive to common languages, and lingual idealism stemming from conventionalism in language games.

The immortality of Soul is an issue tied up to one fundamental doctrine of Abrahamic Religions (particularly Islam and Christianity), i.e. the life after death. One of the theories about the perpetuity of soul is immortality in terms of reincarnation; in its celebrated term, it carries two meanings at least:1- The journey of soul through the cycle of reincarnation of bodies. 2- reincarnation in the framework of bodily resurrection. That is to say, our souls would adopt a physical body in the hereafter life appropriate to it and similar to that of this life.Our method is descriptive-analytic and reference to main texts and holy scriptures of the two religions.  In what follows, the author has demonstrated that Islam and Christianity are unanimous in the rejection of the cycle of reincarnation, both proposed the theory of resurrection, instead. However, the literal meaning of many verses of the Bible and the Qur’an and narrated traditions from prophets and their successors suggest that bodily resurrection will happen in the form of elemental body i.e. in the structure of corporeal reincarnation.