نشریه شناخت
سال پانزدهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 87، پاییز و زمستان 1401)

Muslim sages and Ghazali believe that the theoretical intellect is able to recognize the existence of a necessary thing, devoid of time, place, and regardless of the lineage and additions that it finds with its creatures. And as a result, they say, it is obvious that God's existence and His perfections are subject to our knowledge of His existence, which means that our knowledge causes us to become aware of God's existence And in this regard, they have not made a difference between knowing the essence and the names and attributes of God. But Ibn Arabi has distinguished between proving and knowing God's names and attributes and his essence, and he says that we have no way to know and prove his essence, and he says, Shariat (Book and Sunnah) has never been a reflection of God's nature, talking about God's nature is one of the absurdities of reason, and our knowledge of God is achieved only through His names and attributes, and this knowledge also depends on the appearance and manifestation of God in the world. As a result, our knowledge is subject to God, and the theory of the subjection of science to the knowledge of the known connects it to the knowledge of God, and makes it a prelude to knowing and proving the existence of God. Not in science itself.

Based on the theory of intrinsic movement, change and transformation in transcendental wisdom is based on the theory of action-power. Potential is the kind of perfections that are integrated in a material being in the form of talent. This is the fluid and unstable area of ​​the object that is always moving towards excellence and evolution. On the other hand, actuality is a fixed and complete state that the object maintains in a relative way in the continuity of existence. The theory of essential movement elevated the dual logic of changes in the walking system to a unified logic. The hypothesis of the article is that this theory has the ability to philosophically explain the idea of ​​the unity of science in physics - in the connection between classical physics and quantum physics. An attempt has been made to establish a kind of unifying relationship between classical and quantum fields by descriptive-analytical method and using the framework of the theory of substantial motion and to redefine concepts such as virtual particle and classical limit of a theory. Also, according to the division of physical entities into two categories, classical particle and quantum particle, their ontology is challenged.

In the late period of his thought, Habermas presents his theory of formal pragmatics, inspired by the model of language functions of Karl Bühler and the theory of speech acts, in an effort to solve the deficiency of critical theory and provide a foundation for his social theory. By placing language in primacy as a special medium for gaining understanding, while removing the limitations of common theories of semantics, and using their strengths, formal pragmatics offers a theory beyond the theory of meaning in the way that it can play a role in current philosophical debates about truth, rationality and meaning, and it creates the foundation of the sociological theory of communicative action. This theory operates on the basis of the intertwining of meaning and universal validity claims, which have implications for both Habermas’s social and language philosophy. On the one hand, it provides a more convincing basis for the classification of speech acts than Austin’s proposals or Searle’s theoretical taxonomy. On the other hand, by proposing the doctrine of the internal connection of language with universal validity claims, it offers the possibility of reproducing a specific concept of social order through communicative action. In this way, pragmatics is not just a theory of meaning and unique to the philosophy of language, but is a normative foundation in all fields of knowledge. By narrating the process of forming, the article shows what it is, why it is important and how it goes beyond just a theory of meaning.

This paper deals with Avicenna’s intellectual system in ethics and shows that his ethical system emerges in a totally Neoplatonic structure. Moreover, I show that he uses many Neoplatonic concepts inside this intellectual system. In the most important stage, to disclose the Neoplatonic system of Avicenna’s thought in ethics, I show that his ethics have levels as the most important property of a Neoplatonic system of thought in all its dimensions, from the point where he starts the discussion of ethics to where he discusses the ultimate aim of the ethical act. The presence of levels in Avicenna’s work is so important that one cannot have a correct understanding of his ethics without attention to them. In his thought, levels are examined in three stages according to Neoplatonic patterns: sensible, imaginable, and intelligible level. That means, all the aspects of Avicenna’s ethics like linguistics, metaphysics, epistemology, anthropology, theories, and moral duties, should be examined on three levels: the sensible, imaginable and, intelligible. In the next step, I attend to the concepts he uses from Neoplatonic thought and has employed them in his intellectual system. Besides the levels, many of these kinds of Neoplatonic concepts have been involved in forming this intellectual system.

One of the necessary results of religious pluralism is the issue of tolerance, and a pluralistic person goes towards tolerance in the implementation of the social rules of religion. While believing in pluralism, Ibn Arabi is committed to the implementation of Sharia in all matters. He believes that the thought of pluralism has elements that believers and wayfarers must accept in order to ultimately reach the truth, but true pluralism is worthy of a perfect Man and everyone has their own share of this pluralism. Ibn Arabi takes two ways to achieve tolerance compatible with Islam. One is the design of a type of mystical worldview that shows that every belief is somehow related to the truth and after the implementation of divine hudud in the hereafter, the name of the Most Merciful includes everyone. The other is to draw a kind of practical behavior that is consistent with the acceptance of various beliefs. Therefore, Ibn Arabi tries to lead the society towards tolerance while maintaining the rules of Sharia.

Pessimistic induction is often seen as the main argument against scientific realism. According to this argument, the history of science has revealed that past theories, despite being successful, subsequently turned out to be false, and therefore (given that the only criterion provided by realists, i.e., success, is not indicative of truth), current successful theories are also false. Kyle Stanford believes that the defect in the (standard) pessimistic induction is that realists can challenge it by pointing out how the success of current theories is different from the success of past theories. Therefore, he designs a new (pessimistic) induction in order to overcome such a defect and have a more powerful argument. His induction differs from standard pessimistic induction in that he bases it on theorists instead of theories: Past theorists have repeatedly failed to conceive serious alternatives to their theories, but subsequent scientific inquiries would routinely reveal that there were such alternatives; since current theorists choose their theories based on this failure, then the (approximate) truth of current theories is also not believable.In this paper, we discuss Stanford’s new induction and assess his claim that it is more powerful. The findings of this study show that, although having a different form than the old induction, the new induction is not a stronger argument.

According to the sense datum theory, the object of perception is a sense datum, not an external object. Now in many cases, if not all, perceptual experience has a degree of indeterminacy; despite the fact that state of affairs in the external world is determinate. If a sense datum is the object of perception, then is it determinate or indeterminate? I examine three cases of the indeterminacy: the speckled hen, the intransitivity of the exact similar, the long-haired woman. I argue that in all three cases, the sense datum theory cannot successfully explain the indeterminacy, whether the sense datum is indeterminate or determinate. If the sense datum is indeterminate, then the relation between it and the external object is not well-established, as if the object of perception is not the sense datum. If the sense datum is determinate, then it has characteristics which the subject of perceptual experience is not aware of. The conclusion is at odds with the main motivation of the sense datum theory. Thus the sense datum theory, considering a cognitive indeterminacy as an ontological indeterminacy, becomes vulnerable against the indeterminacy problem.

According to Kripke, someone who fixes the referent of the term "one meter" with the definite description "the length of stick S in Paris at time t" can know a priori that one meter is the length of S in Paris at time t. Scott Soames has reconstructed Kripke's claim as an argument and shown that this argument is based on three principles. He then claimed that the third principle assumes a meaning of the concept of a prior that is inconsistent with the traditional meaning of that concept. So if Kripke's argument is based on the traditional meaning of the concept of a priori, his argument does not work. In this paper, I first provide a detailed formulation of the different interpretations of the meter example and similar ones. This formulation helps us to understand under which interpretation Soames' reconstruction of Kripke's argument should be understood. I then try to show that the main conflict between Soames and Kripke is not about the traditional meaning of the concept of a priori, but about what empirical evidence is. If my claim is true, I conclude that Soames's criticism of Kripke's argument is question-begging at best.Music, Philosophy of Music, Greek Music, alFarabi, Plato

Much of the study of art has historically revolved around the concept of beauty as the most important quality of works of art, and while ugliness has occasionally been spoken of, it has often been used as an opposite or contradictory concept of beauty, and no more. But in the last two centuries, researches has gradually shifted to the concept of ugliness in the art world, and this concept itself, regardless of its relation to beauty, it has been focused and reflected on, although it cannot be speak of aesthetics of ugliness as a rich area under aesthetics in its general sense yet. Therefore, in the essay, we have attempted to provide an introduction to this field of research by dealing with the most important problems of this field. In this way, we first have dealt with what ugliness is and what kinds of ugliness there are, and then have distinguished three types of ugliness: psychological ugliness, aesthetic ugliness, and moral ugliness. Then, we have turned to another important problem in this area, namely the functions of the emergence of ugliness in the art world. And finally we have showed that, just as the appearance of beauty in works of art has its own functions, the appearance of ugliness also has its own functions. Aesthetic function, epistemological function, psychological function, moral function, and propagandic function are the most important causes of ugliness in works of art.

The current article studies the relation between alFarabi`s philosophy of musicand that of Plato.Plato as a Pythagoras with a strong ethical inclination has many arguments on music the most signicant of wich are given in Laws and the republic. Plato is faced with a theoretical and practical change in music in his time and is striving to prove the musica principles and maintain the old musical traditions, Whereas, alFarabi is not in such a historic turning point. He is in the center of Islamic civilization with musical ideas from different cultural backgrounds, has access to the books on Greek music theory, and is obsessed with developing a comprehensive musical sience.The relation between alFarabi`s and Plato`s philosophy of music is studied in four areas: music and cosmos, ethos and paideia, pleasure, utopia, and practical music, and significant differences in all areas have been concluded. Although they share views in same matters, their ideas are basically different. AlFarabi, being beyond Pythagorian discourse, has founded music on experience.

Near-death experiences (NDE) are the experiences of those  who have come back to life on the verge of clinical death via the efforts of medical staff or other factors and, upon their return, have narrated astonishing reports of near-death conditions. These experiences have been reported worldwide and often with phenomenological features, which, according to statistical research, have certain components in common. Due to both the presence of a common core and the pervasiveness of the experiences, NDEs have grasped the attention of researchers as a challenging  explanatory topic in Biomedical Science . The scientists involved in this area have proposed different explanations . Despite the proposed hypotheses, the question remains whether the existing biomedical science paradigm offers a persuasive explanation of these experiences. Furthermore, if the current paradigm fails to explain these experiences , could we consider these experiences as an anomaly in this  paradigm? In this study, we evaluate the topic of NDEs as a sample case in the current paradigm structure based on Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The results of this study suggest that NDEs have turned into an anomaly, and  the current paradigm is in the  state of “extraordinary science”. Despite the various hypotheses proposed for explaining these experiences during the past 48 years, they have yet to fully explain the  phenomena comprehensively . In addition, some scientific articulations and new hypotheses show that the current paradigm becomes more ambiguous in presenting the puzzle-solving exemplars to the scientists working on NDEs in particular and to the biomedical scientists  in general. Although the paradigm does exist, there is no unified understanding of its nature among scientists practitioners working in it.

One of the solutions that philosophers have presented to justify the emergence of plurality from unity has been to consider a hierarchy of beings. Sana'i Ghaznavi is among the thinkers who believed in a hierarchy for beings and was influenced by the Neoplatonists in this discussion. But Sana'i is also influenced by religious wisdom. This has caused his opinion differ from Muslim Neoplatonic thinkers. His emphasis on the divine will and the dependence of the general intellect and the general soul on the matter is, more than anything else, what shows his difference from the Neoplatonic philosophers. While considering a role for mediators in creation, Sana'i emphasizes that they are a facet of the divine order and what is really the cause of creation of beings is divine power and God directly created beings. Sana'i is more intent on praising God and uses the general intellect and soul for this purpose. However, what really exists in his opinion is not the intellect and the soul, but God.