فصلنامه ذهن
سال هشتم شماره 2 (پیاپی 30، تابستان 1386)

Cognitive linguistics is one of the important branches of cognitive sciences and among new approaches in linguistics which is less than 20 years old. In this short period, however, it has caused a salient development in the field of linguistics and analysis of texts. In the present article, at first, the author tries to present an overview of this discipline. To do so, he has mentioned some important points in the article, which are as follows: the role played by perspective and relation between construal and external situations, form and substratum, trajector and landmark and frame. Then, some instances have been provided to show the importance of such concepts to analyze the Holy Quran. According to the author, introduction of this discipline in the field of the Quranic interpretation and semantics will lead to a striking development. Thus, in conclusion, some impacts of this discipline in this field have been mentioned

In the present article, at first, some similarities between "causation" and the principle of causal determinism in classical physics and Islamic philosophy will be discussed. Then, the author tries to show how the above concepts are criticized in both epistemic fields by the relevant sciences, i.e. modern physics and Islamic kalam.

On the one hand, Hume considers necessity as one of the sources of causation, and rejects the presence of the idea of necessity on the other. Also, he gives two various definitions for causation, according to one of which causation is reduced to the order of events, and in the other, mind plays a more important role. In spite of his skeptic approach, in some places he accepts existence of things which are responsible for the order of things. In the present article, the author tries to redefine "object", make a separation between descriptive and revisionist aspects of his philosophy and distinguish between relative and specific ideas, and thus to give a consistent reading of Hume.

Perspective of producing man by the technology of cloning has caused everincreasing concerns for experts and ordinary people. If access to this technology is made possible, parents will, certainly, wish to have more control on characteristics of their future children, and thus, produce them based on their own desires which, in turn, will lead to loss of the quality of family life and status of parents and children. In addition, many scholars of ethics are worry about spiritual-psychological damages to cloned individuals; for, their sense of "uniqueness" may fade away, or they may have a particular sense of themselves which has not been experienced as far. Though years ago hypothesis of genetic determinism was rejected, some people ask whether this technology is able to produce particular difficulties concerning "identity", "individuality", and in particular "psychological identity". Should we redefine ourselves and our identities, and determine what role genetic structure plays in formation of this identity? And… In the present writing, while confirming some of such concerns, the author discusses them and, in conclusion, he says that, because of some problems, this technology should not be employed to producing man in the present time.

Charles Darwin is the founder of the theory of evolution by natural selection in biology. In the present article, the author shows that Darwin was well-aware of the philosophy of science in his own age, i.e. the 19th Century. He tried to observe, in particular, standards provided by two philosophers of that time, Herschel and Hewell. Also, the author shows reactions made by Herschel, Hewell, and the other leading philosopher of science of that time, i.e. John Stuart Mill to Darwin theory. Interestingly enough, such responses were related to, more than to philosophy of science, theology. And this shows importance of Darwin theory in theological debates.

In the present article, the author tries to review general ideas about relation between science and religion and, while doing so, he explains Einstein's view to science and religion. The essence of Einstein's view is that not only science and religion are not in conflict, but they are in harmony and have mutual influences. He has summarized his own idea in this famous sentence "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind".

Kant's epistemological ideas are among the most important and basic parts of his thought and have had strange impacts on epistemology, theology, and philosophy of science after him. One of the most important parts of his theory of epistemology is his new approach to space and time. Having introduced such approach, he aimed to explain mathematics. He believed that his own approach to space and time and their relation to mathematics is the only defendable one. In the present article, relying on scientific developments in geometry and physics, the author has tried to study and analyze Kant's approach to space and time. In conclusion, the author shows that non-Euclidian geometry and Einstein's theory of relativity have made Kant's approach to space and time unacceptable.

Without the gift of prophecy, looking into the future is hazardous. The sun will rise tomorrow because it rose yesterday and the day before. Induction is reasonably viable if one is predicting simple systems. But induction is notoriously problematic, both for logical and empirical reasons, especially if one is dealing with complex systems. If one predicts of the past and present, one will be right much, even most of the time, but wrong at the times of critical innovation, the most important times of all, when the future is unlike the past.