فصلنامه پژوهش های فلسفی - کلامی
سال دوم شماره 4 (پیاپی 10، پاییز و زمستان 1380)

That how knowledge is possible has always been one of the most important issues of philosophy considered by philosophers since long who gave different solutions.In the chapter of mental existence, difining knowledge as the representation of what things are or their presence in the mind of a perceiver, Muslim philosophers tried to explicate the correspondence of perception with what is perceived. Nothing it is only the notion of a thing - not its essence or reality nor its particular referent or extenion that is aquired by the mind, and distinguishing two kinds of predication: the first order and the second order ones, Mulla Sadra goes to answer the question and to resolve the puzzles. A further attempt has been made by some later philosophers to abstract the philosophical notions through some sort of mental contemplations in mental events. They say the first order propositions are made of these abstract notions, and their truth-value is known to be above question. Second order propositions if made of the first order ones accordig to logical principles will be the truth-function of them and their truth is thus known to be conclusive, too. In this article, we are going to consider the two theories and to evaluate the degree of how they could afford the issue.

Immortality and the desire for eternal future as principles of all divine religions have been the turning point in the stream of human thoughts awarding the true meaning to man's life. From the very beginning to the end, one's destiny has been determined by the degree of one's belief in and desire for eterninty. The more convincing the picture of eternity (Resurrection) is, the more confidence from our heart we shall have in it. Prophet Abraham quenched his thirst to know of how people would resurrect after the death by an experience of some vision of certainty, because vision and picture are the means of thought and pave the may for human world-view.This article is an attempt to get to the best theories on the ascenion of man and his life of hereafter. Having considered all theories and ideas on eternity, the author refered to Mulla Sadra's as the best.

Viewing the improtance of anthropology in Mulla Sadra's transcendent philosophy, the author has tried to define human being, and to consider the question of mind and body and their interactions in virtue of both ontology and epistemology i.e. passing throug the hierarchical stages of being and the status of senses of mind in knowledge. This survey results in determining the role of knowledge in the perfection of man both in theory and practice.

What Human souls shall exist after the death? Do human souls lose their individual determinations and change into one universal soul or shall they keep their individual determinations in plurality? These are the questions considered by Al-Farabi, Avicenna and Mulla sadra. This article deals with the views of these metaphysicians on the question. Having explained their ideas, the author comes to this conclusion that Al-Farabi believed that some human souls would be mortal, but the other two metaphysicians thaught all human souls as immortal. Having considered three arguments given by Avicenna to prove the immortality of all human souls, and critised Mulla Sadra's objections, it becomes clear that Sadra's objections fail to be raised.On the question of unification of particular souls to form one univeral soul after the death, it becomes evident that unlike some scholars, Al-Farabi did not believe in a universal soul making all particular souls lose their individual determinations.Having surveyed Sadra's ideas on intelligence in the question of unification of human souls with the active intellect, we concluded that Sadra would not believe in a universal soul.

In this article, different kinds of scepticism are, first, discussed, and then the three arguments of "a brain in a big container", "the presence of error", and "the value of experiment" are suggested in defence of scepticism. the author, then, continues to criticise the arguments of secpticism.

In what follows, comes the persian translation of wittgenstein entry from Encyclopedia of Philsophy edited by Paul Edward. The biogrophy and about two points of less importance are left out to shorten the article. In the first section the picture theory of language and in the second the usage of language are set forth.Prior to this, an article of research on the same subject by the translator was published in Hawzeh & University Quarterly Journal N0.24-25, of which can be said to be a helpful complement to this translation.

This article goes to introduce and criticise the humanism of two and the most famous existentialists, Sartre and Heidegger.Humanism which dates back to ancient Hellenic period has been interpreted very differently through history. In his Existentialism and Humanism, Sarter accepted a kind of humanism which was harshly critised by Heidegger in his A Letter on Humanism. All previous account, Heidegger believes, of humanism suffer from a common mistake. Heidegger's approach to humanism was entirely new, explained through his philosophical principles on existence and Dasein.

Dialogue has been a requirement of the social man since long, and it proves to be the appropriate way to survey and resolve the difficulties of today. This essay is a reserch explaining the substructure of Islam and Christianity inter-religious talks looking for the practical ways to establish some sound social relations and constant symbiosis between Muslims and Christians. These ways are based on the pure and unmixed principles of the two religions.As an eminent professor of Lebanon University and the one who is internationally active in inter-religious talks and dialogue of civilizations, the author believes in divine religions as the pure sources of freedom, equality, and brotherhood among all people, inspiring comprehensive reformations of human societies.

Philosophy of law deals with the meaning of rules, their source of compulsion, their ends, and the differences of rules of law and those of ethics and religion.Philosophy of law tooks at the general theories on law, regardless of this or that particular branch or system of law. These issues in persian literature, are dealt with under such titles as the generalities of law, the general theory of law, and the like.First, in what follows, come the difinitions of related terms, the history of philosophy of law, and the aspects of need to complile a philosophy of law. Then specifying the subject matter, we introduce different schools of law - positivist, idealist, Islamic, and natural right schools - and their different basis. Next we set forth the objections raised to the positivist and natural right schools in brief.At last, the ends of law in the individualist and collectivist theories are surveyed very concisely.