فصلنامه ذهن
سال بیست و چهارم شماره 2 (پیاپی 94، تابستان 1402)

Determining the meaning of the text is one of the important issues of contemporary language philosophy. Philosophical hermeneutics, in response to this problem, believes in the indeterminacy of the meaning of the text. Determining the meaning of the text has been proposed with regard to the many meanings that determination has in terms of ontology, semantics, epistemology and methodology, and among them, the determination of the meaning of the text in the sense of "discovering the meaning of the speaker" has been discussed in the light of semantic foundations.

Determining the meaning of the text is defined in the triad of "possibility, probability, and determination" and this matching has been done by emphasizing the views of Searle and Shahid Sadr with library and analytical methods and sometimes using hybrid methods and linguistic philosophy.

John Searle has explained the meaning of the text by relying on basics such as the theory of speech act, Intentionality, and collective Intentionality, and by emphasizing methods such as concentration and linguistic descriptions, classification of speech acts and rules, and by emphasizing the anatomy of the brain, and in other words, He has achieved the explanation of the organization of the institutional communication of meaning; And on the other hand, Martyr Shahid Sadr, relying on the issues of status (vaze) and Strict conjugation (qarn akid), the theory of usage (Istimal), the authority of emergence (hojat) and the linguistic system, and a special effort in the social understanding of the text (nas), relying on the method of manifestation and possibilities, in a kind of natural definition of determining their meaning in the light Social understanding is achieved.

The findings of this research show that the two researchers have a point in common in "no reference to extra-language", "regularity of language", "authenticity of appearance and rules", "contextualism" and in "confusion between the definite article and the spoken verb", "linguistic communication unit", "criterion of meaningfulness and provability", "institutional explanation of meaning", "theory of implication", "meaning and intention" and "theory of application and use" have been distinguished from each other. Therefore, the intellectual difference between the two intellectual traditions in the issue of determining meaning can be seen as arising from the intellectual paradigm of the two thinkers, on the other hand, it should be noted that the social rules of meaning and relying on the rules of consistency in Searle's view and his reliance on institutional realities and Shahid Sadr's emphasis on linguistic concentration and authenticity arising from the degree of truth and probability is more rooted in two intellectual paradigms, institutional and proof of meaning, and it should be examined in the context of meaning; Searle's reliance on individual Intentionality and his rejection of it in terms of collective Intentionality are seen very faintly in the Shahid Sadr view’s, perhaps if it were not for the fallacy of confusion between validity and truth and the science of the principles of jurisprudence did not find its language in philosophy and theoretical sciences, the attempt The theoretical approaches to connect the layer of probability to determination, or the layer of suspicion to certainty in the science of the principles of jurisprudence, do not remain incomplete. The efforts of analytical philosophy in the analysis of intention in the subjective and universal layers and his deep investigations on issues based on intention in the science of principles and the intellectual system of Shahid Sadr are effective and can change them.

Philosophical hermeneutics claims that understanding is born of historical conditions in various ways and is necessarily affected by it, and with its change, the conditions of understanding change and are formed according to new conditions. According to Gadamer, understanding is subject to various historical conditions, such as the interpreter's semantic horizon, his presuppositions, and the applicability of understanding. According to Heidegger, understanding is subject to fore-Having, fore-Sight, foreconception, which are all aspects of human existence. Dignity determines how a person understands; These are the main form of subsequent understandings and they are also fluid and influenced by historical conditions. Understanding is always the result of the fusion of historical horizons and as a result, the production of new meaning, not the reproduction of the author's meaning; Therefore, it is not possible to reach the author's intention. The above-mentioned dignity and the factors involved in self-understanding cannot be considered and studied independently, because whatever is chosen to be understood, it is understood through the channel of these virtues.

This article tries to deal with this issue with the method of inferring the verses of the Quran and inferring from them and with a critical view.

The findings of the article are summarized below -What is obtained from several verses of the Qur'an is not a criticism of historical foundations, because the Qur'an has no entrance to these new specialized topics; Rather, the denial of the result of these foundations means the denial of the inherent historicity of understanding, and when the result is denied, the original foundations are also questioned. Different categories of verses with implied implication can the negation of the inherent nature of all the dignity of understanding, which in Gadamer's view has caused the inherent historicity of understanding. -The verses informing about the occurrence of education, which comes along with the mention of education, imply that the understanding has been realized in accordance with reality and is permanent, and it implies with implied implication that the understanding of fact has occurred without the interference of the historical assumptions of man and his historical horizon; While in philosophical hermeneutics, all understandings are necessarily historical. -All different categories of verses that indicate the possibility of knowledge are incompatible with the inherent historicity of understanding. -There are many verses in the Qur'an that indicate, contrary to the claim of philosophical hermeneutics, that man has the ability to look independently at himself, his mind, his thoughts and ideas.

Consideration in the verses indicates that the meaning of different categories of verses independently or by adding some rational considerations does not agree with the view of the inherent historicity of understanding; Rather, the opposite can be inference from the verses.

Probably, the answer to the difficult problem of consciousness is one of the most complicated problems in the philosophy of mind. At the same time, consciousness is very familiar to us, but it seems difficult to explain it. So far, many theories have come up to answer the difficult problem of consciousness. One of these theories is the sensory-motor approach claims that the rules between sensory inputs and motor outputs are able to explain the phenomenal quality. Adherents of the neural workspace approach try to explain consciousness by separating personal and sub-personal space and consider consciousness to be the result of what happens at the personal level. Sensory-motor approaches have problems in explaining their claim. Degnar believe that the integration of sensory-motor and neural workspace solves the challenges of both well.

The research method in this article is descriptive and the challenges in both approaches have been addressed as much as possible.

Neural workspace theories alone face the challenge of considering only the internal aspects of the brain and neural processes responsible for creating consciousness. Although they can provide explanations about the neural correlates of consciousness, they cannot explain the quality of a experience tells us something. In contrast, embodied approaches tried to solve this problem by moving away from the idea that perception is something related to our brains. They try to attribute conscious understanding to a person with a body who is in a certain position and is interacting with the world. Oregan claims mastery of the sensorimotor rules that we acquire in interaction with the environment alone to explain How to get consciousness is enough, but despite the efforts of the organization, such a view has serious challenges. Although Degennar tries to create a coherent structure of these two theories, he does not reach the desired result. Therefore, the combination of these two views may be a relatively suitable explanation to describe the extroverted and introverted aspects of awareness, but it cannot explain the quality of consciousness. What these approaches should answer exactly is why combining these approaches and structuring them with each other creates a certain complexity, after which we get a phenomenal feeling. The combination of sensorimotor and workspace approaches, contrary to their claims, do not have the ability to respond to the absolute gap of explanation. The integration of such views may be able to provide descriptions about the comparative gap, but the question still remains, why are some of our experiences associated with consciousness?

According to sensorimotor approach, they have many descriptive problems in response to such a challenge. Although sensorimotor theories have relative success by combining bodily actions with the outside world and trying to distance themselves from the explanation of consciousness through brain processes, there is always this question. that all that is talked about as the discovery of meaning and consciousness, apart from the fact that it takes place in the brain or in our bodily interactions under a series of sensorimotor criteria, in what context does such views happen ? this view by discarding concepts such as the soul or The human ego considers such concepts responsible for the mysteriousness of the intellectual space regarding the way of perception, but they do not provide much explanation about the self that is discovering external meanings.

Qom Academy of Islamic Sciences was founded by Seyyed Muniruddin Hosseini, and after his death, it is managed by Hojat al-Islam Seyyed Mohammad Mahdi Mirbaghri. This collection has unique ideas. What differentiates the theory of the academy in various subjects such as humanities, religious science, Islamic civilization, western studies, etc., is more than anything rooted in the epistemological opinions of this collection. On the other hand, the theory of orientation of science can be introduced as the main result and product of this type of epistemology. This article consists of three parts. First, the term orientation is conceptualized and its three meanings are examined from the perspective of the academy. In the next part, the foundations and epistemological principles governing the orientation of sciences (the third meaning) are explained. And in the final part, these principles will be criticized and evaluated. The method of this research is descriptiveanalytical and library type. The findings show that from the perspective of the Academy of Islamic Sciences, the direction of science has three meanings: efficiency, methodology and epistemology. Farhangistan claims that the first and second meanings can be proven even on the common epistemological basis, but the third meaning is based only on the epistemological foundations of this collection.

The direction of science in the epistemological sense has five foundations: First: the principle of effectiveness instead of the principle of causality; That is, when a person enters the operation of understanding, it is not only chemical interactions that determine the fate of knowledge. Rather, a more important role is played by the originality of a person's agency and will. Second: the fit of the face with the exterior instead of the matching of the two; That is, according to the process of effectiveness and the effect of wills in understanding and on the other hand, the unreasonableness of matching the face and the outside, the matching of the mental face with the outside is bound and becomes "proportion". That is, the perception or perceptual form is proportional to reality, evidence and other things. Third, evaluation of knowledge by measuring truth and falsehood instead of truth and falsehood; That is, the evaluation of human knowledge should use the criteria of "right" and "false". in the process of understanding before the discovery of reality occurs; An optional operation has been performed. If the conscious agent's will in the process of understanding is in accordance with God's servitude and obedience, his understanding will be right, and if it is based on rebellion and disobedience to God, his understanding will be invalid. Fourth: Relativity in understanding and worship; The difference in understanding is rooted in the relativity of worship. Where there is infallibility in worship, there will be no difference in understanding. Fifth: the combination of motivation and motivation; To the extent that the motivations are incorrect, the motivations and the content will be inherently affected, and the motivations cannot be separated from the motivation and used for other purposes.

Since all these foundations face serious criticism, this theory is also unacceptable. Other theories of the academy, which are based on this type of epistemology, will become indefensible. Among others, we can mention the theory of "direction of science", "religious science" and ‘philosophizing’.

The dualistic theory of the characteristic in the philosophy of mind considers human beings to be entirely physical from the point of view of substance, however, it assigns two types of characteristics to the said physical substance; Physical property and non-physical (mental) property. In the meantime, the most serious problem facing the dualists of the characteristic is the danger of them being pushed towards epiphenomenalism. epiphenomenalism does not accept the causality and effect on the physical body without rejecting the principle of realization of non-physical (mental) characteristics. As a result, in addition to making it difficult for someone who wants to bridge poperty dualism to substance dualism, the poperty dualism itself leads to monotheism. In this article, in addition to the original problems, we have presented several structural and structural problems in refuting epiphenomenalism, and at the end, we have criticized the theories that led to epiphenomenalism. Method of Study: We use analytical-rational method in this article.

It should be said about the origin of epiphenomenalism; As mentioned, the basis of epiphenomenalism is the dualism of characteristics; But it is questionable how a mental philosopher like Jackson, who designed the "cognition" argument to prove the distinction between mental and physical characteristics, has given epiphenomenalism to mental qualities and like Davidson for Mental characteristics do not have a causal role? (For further study on the change of Jackson's point of view, refer to: Martin Nida-Remilin, it can be said; The same explanatory gap that led to Cartesian essence dualism despite its admirable advantages, the same crisis occurred for attribute dualism; To say that after Descartes proposed the pineal gland in response to Elizabeth's question about the interaction between soul and body, philosophers were disappointed with the way Descartes went and instead of repairing Descartes' arguments (which was possible because Descartes' problem The failure to find a correct explanation of the causality between the mind and the brain was not the absence of any correct explanation - in this context, refer to: basically, he moved from essential dualism to homogenous, reductionist and physicalist theories such as behaviorism and functionalism.

For someone who accepts the poperty dualism, it is necessary to remove the factor called epiphenomenalism, which introduces the mental attributes as secondary matters and considers them to be ineffective especially in relation to mental matters. In the present article, in order to remove the obstacle called epiphenomenalism, we stated in the first step, despite the fact that the origin of epiphenomenalism, i.e. "physical causal layer" has been proven to be distorted, this origin cannot be the causality of mental affairs in relation to In the second step, we proved that the promise of epiphenomenalism practically destroys the dualistic structure of the attribute and once again leads it to monotheism. In the third step, we introduced five forms based on epiphenomenalism; First, the manat that neutralizes the effect of mental things on physical things, the same manat can negate the effect of physical things on the mind, which is accepted by epiphenomenalism. Secondly, believing in the doctrine of epiphenomenalism is a self-contradictory event; Because the mentioned belief is effective in epiphenomenalism behaviors. Thirdly, acceptance of epiphenomenalism makes there is practically no difference between a zombie and a real person. Fourthly, we can make a proof with present and experimental premises and prove the effect of mental things on physical things in a present-acquired (experimental) way. Fifthly, the promise of epiphenomenalism actually denies what is confirmed by empirical science, because from an empirical point of view, mental matters (regardless of whether they are physical or non-physical) affect physical matters.

Semantic change is a subject examined in lexical semantics. Meaning is not a fixed, unchangeable phenomenon. Lexical semantics have led cognitive linguists to consider meaning as a network. “Semantics” has the property of radiality. That is to say it forms a radial network around a core meaning, from which other peripheral meanings are evolved by its flexibility. The radial network is not an instrument to produce different meanings from the core meaning. Rather, it is a model showing how different but connected meanings are stored in the semantic memory. The present research aims to examine the radial network of dabar in the Quran because a clear understanding of Quranic words is an important step in its accurate interpretation and understanding.

The radial network theory is one proposed in cognitive semantics with the cognitive analysis of word meanings in different contexts as its endpoint. In this theory, the meaning of peripheral words evolve from a core meaning and the core meaning forms other meanings as a result of schematic change and flexible metaphorical extension. The outcome of this viewpoint is the radial network: a conceptual network in which several concepts are structured around a core concept. The process binding the core and peripheral meanings is called chaining.

“Posterior” as the core meaning of dabar is a preconception of the embodiment of human sensorimotor perceptions experienced within the context of “orientation”, giving it structure. Researching the word dabar in the Arabic language family shows that “posterior” is an ancient word found in Hamito-Semitic languages. Various derivatives have been formed with this word in Arabic and other related languages, indicating its significance in meaningmaking. The semantic range of the word is broadened with different combinations. Schematic changes are effective in this semantic broadening, leading to a flexible metaphorical extension and meaningmaking. Existing schema-based metaphors in the present research have paved the way with their changes for meanings such as fear, offspring, heedlessness, misguidance, pursuit, time, purposeful knowledge, and listening. The meanings have been obtained from changes in the schemas of orientation, force, motion, balance, cycle, and process.

The obtained radial network is the outcome of eight peripheral meanings structured around a core meaning. The meaning of “posterior” as the most antiquated meaning is a pivotal member of the radial network, incorporating the image schemas of “orientation”, a cognitive concept experienced in the embodiment of human sensorimotor perceptions which give it structure and are easy to learn. “Orientation” as the most frequent schema in meaning-making for the derivatives of dabar is followed by the schemas of force, motions, cycle and balance in this meaning-making. The more abstract the meaning, the more schemas are called for meaning-making. There is a relationship between the obtained radial categories, all of which serve to express human’s experiencing monotheism. In examining the obtained radial network with a cognitive approach to the expressed meanings of the lexicon, some of the meanings are similar, and others such as time, misguidance, listening, and fear are words with no shared meanings.