فصلنامه فلسفه دین
سال بیستم شماره 2 (پیاپی 59، تابستان 1402)

A fundamental and profound cosmological question concerns the ultimate cause of the existence of our universe. Some physicists, based on quantum cosmology, believe that it originated from nothing. Edward Tryon claims that our universe emerged spontaneously from quantum vacuum as a virtual particle. On the other hand, Alexander Vilenkin proclaims that it came into being from nothing through quantum tunneling, without the need for a pre-vacuum state. The present issue is to study these explanations using a biblical-descriptive method and evaluate them through a rational analytical approach. The result shows that these suggestions lack some scientific standards. Moreover, they offer nothing more than a hypothesis about how the universe came into being, without addressing the question of why it happened. Therefore, they cannot negate the necessity of a metaphysical explanation of the world

Personal identity and the criteria for the continuity of human existence are of special interest to theologians due to their crucial role in the afterlife. The objections and criticisms raised in the fields of philosophy of religion and philosophy of mind regarding the possibility of personal identity have led some to believe that explaining existential identity between a person in this world and the person resurrected after death is not feasible. As a result, theories like "the closest continuer" have been proposed. These theories have motivated certain Christian theologians, including Stephen Davis, to defend the possibility of the continuation of personal identity against these objections and doubts. In response to criticisms that overlook the theological foundations of the issue, Davis has attempted to explain the possibility of personal identity by adopting an intra-religious approach and considering the absolute "will of God." Davis insists that addressing the present problem and responding to its criticisms requires taking its theological foundations into account. This article conducts a descriptive-analytical study of Davis's works to critically analyze his approach and methodology in using theological foundations to counter the criticisms raised in the philosophy of religion and the philosophy of mind

This paper investigates the question, "What is the model of a successful argument in natural theology?" The three criteria of persuasion, acceptance of premises, and cumulative case, which have been proposed to justify or reject theism, are analyzed using an analytical-critical method. The result shows that none of these criteria, due to their limitations, are individually adequate for a successful argument. The main idea of the paper is to view religious beliefs as the result of a logical-epistemological process and to consider various factors for the success of religious arguments. Therefore, instead of adhering to a specific criterion, one should regard the criterion as a "process." This concept brings our attention to several important points: Firstly, choosing a single criterion for all arguments or measuring and classifying different arguments based on a common criterion is difficult and challenging because there is no consensus on the goal, method, sources, and scope of natural theology. Secondly, it is better to focus on the overall advantages and strengths of the criteria as a whole. Thirdly, one should not perceive the criterion of a successful argument as one-dimensional. Rather, view the criterion as a "process" that allows each criterion to consider the merits of other criteria despite its own strengths. Fourthly, by considering the criterion as a process, the relationship and interaction of these three criteria become possible according to the type, stage, and context of the argument. Consequently, in natural theology, we can benefit from all three criteria together and not separately

The current research aims to provide an analytical answer to the question "What is Mulla Sadra and Brommer's opinion about the change or non-change of the divine nature?" The research has been formulated, and its most important data indicate the following: While Sadra believes that there is no change in the divine essence, he does not present this argument independently. Instead, he addresses this issue under the concept of "simple truth" and explains the problem of "Badah" concerning the absence of change and passivity in the divine will and knowledge. Mulla Sadra's research authors assert that by distinguishing between the levels of divine knowledge and differentiating intrinsic and actual knowledge while questioning the divine will, the essence of truth can be regarded as a guide to any kind of change. On the contrary, Brommer holds a different view compared to Sadra. According to open theology principles, Ishan Brommer believes in the changeability of the essence of the Almighty. Not only does he not consider this changeability as a defect, but he also explains a kind of perfection in the essence. In light of his belief, this changeability gives meaning to the relationship between man and God

One of the important topics in contemporary philosophy of religion is religious epistemology. This issue is predominantly discussed with an analytical approach. Of course, attempts have been made to infer the views of philosophers regarding this matter by referring to continental philosophies. Similarly, insights from thinkers in the Iranian-Islamic tradition have been utilized to gain a better understanding of this topic. In this article, I will discuss the doctrine of education, which is considered one of the most crucial foundations of Ismaili Shia religious epistemology. There is a notable difference between Ismailiyyah (Batinyyah, didacticism) and Imamiyyah. However, they share an opinion in one of the most important beliefs, i.e., believing in the infallible Imam and obeying him. Analyzing the theory of education and the criticisms included in it can help to better understand the theory of Imamate among the Imams. Moreover, understanding the doctrine of education is of fundamental importance in comprehending the religious epistemology of Ismailia. The problem addressed in this research is the analysis of Ghazali's criticism of the doctrine of education.

The issue of gender was extensively discussed for the first time in Plato's dialogues, especially in the Republic, and since then, many views have been raised about it. In this article, we will explain and analyze Plato's perspective on why and how women benefit from equal education and the necessity of their entry into the economic, political, and social fields in his utopia. Furth  ermore, we will investigate the idea of gender equality in the context of punishment, emphasizing the theory of comprehensive punishment, purposeful and basic justice. In the present study, it will become clear that the determining components of the Platonic theory of punishment are not related to the element of "gender." Instead, they focus on the element of "soul" rather than the human body. In other words, among the three general life periods of the soul (previous life, together with the body, and after separation from the body), "punishment" is related to the middle period of the soul's life. Secondly, according to Plato, the goal of punishment, even in cases where physical punishment may be considered, is originally and essentially aimed at the soul, not the body. Thirdly, achieving stability, security, and justice in society, which are essentially the Platonic ideals, is possible only in the shadow of the theory of punishment independent of gender. This is why he defends the idea of gender equality in the Republic