فصلنامه آیین حکمت
پیاپی 10 (زمستان 1390)

The division of knowledge into representational and presential is innovation Islamic philosophers. Ibn Sina had some allusions for the first time in his works then Shaykh Suhrawardi in a clear and explicit way made a distinction between the two and argued accordingly.Knowledge by presence as is well-known is that sort of knowledge through which the reality of the known fact is present to the knower without mediation of the representative form while in representational sort the knowledge is obtained through representative form. Hence appears the most important difference between the two types of knowledge: incorrigibility of the former and corrigibility of the latter. The knowledge by presence is accordingly certain while that of representation is in need of establishing its truth and correspondence with reality.On the basis of these considerations one can raise the question of the relation between these two types of knowledge. Is it possible to base representational and fallible acts of knowledge upon certain and incorrigible acts of knowledge by presence and guarantees the truth and validity of representational knowledge? The Late Allama Tabatabae is the first to notice this relation and raise the "reduction of the representational to presential knowledge. This article is an attempt to study the different interpretations of this reduction and present all possible relations between the two types of knowledge.

In exploring such philosophical issues as perception, imagination, soul of animal and finally the Gathering of animals in resurrection Day the author of this article makes use of angelic thoughts of the pre-eminent of Mulla Sadra Shirazi with a hope to open up a new horizon from the midst of words of this great thinker who took up the philosophical enterprise of philosophers like Ibn Sina And Suhrawardi in an original way. Mulla Sadra, to begin with, defines perception in a way that extends to the domain of animals and shows that they in their parts have a share in perception. The second step is the use of immateriality of imagination, which is regarded as Sadra's masterpiece, to prove the immateriality of animal souls and finally present an outline for the Gathering of animals. Not certain and purely philosophical as it may be, this achievement is well-grounded and at least supported by traditional evidence.

Paul Tillich, a great modern theologian, has offered a peculiar view on the nature of faith ant its relation with reason. In his view faith is not knowledge of reality nor belief in a proposition, nor a doctrinal choice nor an especial personal feeling towards a person or thing. All of these however play a role in faith. According to Tillich faith is the state of ultimate concern an act of the whole personality occurring at the center of personal life and engaging the whole personality. Tillich has divided reason into instrumental and ontological ones. He holds that instrumental reason in the sense of scientific method, logical precision and technological calculation as degenerated form of ontological reason which is the principle of meaning and structure and a n origin of criteria and principles. He maintains that reason and other cognitive properties such as science are not in a position to judge on faith. The reality of faith is totally apart from reality of reason. Tillich’s account of faith and reason has been the object of criticism by Christian critics. This article is an attempt to have a critical analysis of Tillich's view on faith and reason on the basis of the principles of Islam

Immanuel Kant's ideas and true understanding of them is possible only in the subjectivist context of his critical philosophy. In examining his view of existence therefore one must consider the foundations of his thought like distinction of the noumenal from the phenomenal world and inaccessibility of the former to human reason.Kant reduced existence from external and real domain to mental category in the domain of mind and denied the predicative existence acknowledging only copula existence. He thus regarded existence not as a dimension of reality but only as a mentally constructed matter. in the domain of mind therefore unlike other concepts the concept of existence when attributed does not add anything new to the content of the subject but only acts as a copula (a connective role) in compound propositions and posits the subject itself in simple propositions.

Knowledge of the Unseen is of non-sensory acts of knowledge which is not expected to be achieved for the ordinary people. This sort of knowledge is open only to self-purified man who is free from worldly belongings. The present article is to explain the possibility of obtaining this type of knowledge by reference to viewpoints of philosophers as well as teachings of Islamic Shariah according to which one can have an access to the world of the Unseen and achieve this extraordinary sort of knowledge by cleansing his heart and removing the obstacles. Many people can in principle enjoy the knowledge of the Unseen which is primarily restricted to Allah. It is only secondarily and by the permission of Allah that holy prophets, their trustees, and other men of God can enjoy this peculiar knowledge.

Of important epistemological problems is the relation of soul with cognitive forms which is the matter of severe dispute among philosophers. The formulation Mulla Sadra offered on soul and its relation with cognitive forms is new and proper solution for the problem.In giving new definition and analysis of the soul and its faculties in transcendent philosophy Mulla Sadra was influenced by mystical view of Ibn Arabi on similarity of human soul and its acts with manifestations of God in His creation. Allah created human soul as an image of His Essence, Attributes and Acts.

Most of authors on political ideas of Ibn Sina acknowledged implicitly that he lacked the political thought in modern sense in the field of politics and government of societies. James W. Morris among others in an article entitled “philosopher-prophet in political philosophy of Ibn Sina" has a different view on political philosophy of Avicenna which is in complete opposition with other important views on the subject.Morris holds philosophers to be the only competent interpreters of prophetic heritage. in his view Avicenna holds no privileged and peculiar status for the Prophets at which other people cannot arrive. Faculty of estimation (cognitive faculty) and holy intellect are common to human species not reserved for the Prophets. The source of prophetic knowledge is familiar source for all. In order to promote the pursuit of philosophy and to show compatibility of reason and Scripture Ibn Sina was compelled to keep silence on political problems and thus his words on politics are not truly believed by him. Ibn Sina as Morris presented believes that political authority is reserved for philosophers and accordingly gives a fundamental role to philosophy. This article is to summarize the main content of Morris thought under five topics and concludes each with critical examination.