فصلنامه فلسفه دین
سال یازدهم شماره 1 (پیاپی 22، بهار 1393)

In spite of Aristotle، who settled the fundamental basis of his philosophical system «the metaphysical difference between matter and form»، to reach the difference between sensible and nonsensory and to reach the unmoved mover that is natural agent، Avicenna chose «the metaphysical difference between existence and essence» to reach the difference between necessity and possibility and to prove the divine agent، namely creational agent cause and pure being that is Allah Almighty. But Mulla Sadra discussed about objective reality of existence and its gradational degrees، instead of discussion about extensions of existence and conformity of the concept of existence on them، to settle the fundamental basis of his philosophical system «primacy of existence over quiddity» or «principality of existence». This article، explains various views about agency of Allah Almighty and finally concludes that Avicenna believes in Allah Almighty as agent-by-foreknowledge in the first sense، but Mulla Sadra believes in Allah Almighty as agent by self-manifestation and، in his another view، as agent-by-foreknowledge in the second sense.

Rationality is the most prominent action and characteristic of humanity that different schools of thought and philosophy see their reputation and survival in attribution to it. This article seeks to answer this question which how the Transcendent Wisdom as the highest symbol of Shi''ite rationality to draw basic conditions of just thinking and wise intellection and it is based on what elements? And to achieve truth and open up bright horizons facing humanity it recommends the intellectuals observing what principles? By examining the works of Mulla Sadra it is obtained that he emphasizes on the principles and rules، not as only ethical and guidance advices but as scientific and reasoning necessity، that it is inevitable to observe them and achieve facts and discover the new horizons for obtaining a larger world، that some of these principles and rules such as reason – pivot، faith، being arcuate، wisdom، freedom، cleaning up the appearance by Shari''a and purity of heart from inappropriate thoughts are positive and proving criteria، and its usage in various areas of reflection is essential، that they are interpreted «the necessities of rationality» in this research. Some of other principles and rules such as inherent defect، impurity of gem of life، away from favorable end، fallen wearing and unawareness of favorable way are nonpositive that abstinence from them is essential، and they are interpreted «the barriers of rationality».

Reason in Mu`tazila`s of basreh is explained by interpretations like knowledge، prohibition، thought، opinion، way to achieve knowledge، and apprehension of religious duties. They were the first group of Sunnis that benefited from speculative reason in cognition of religion; and argued for good and evil of deeds through practical reason، and rejected vile action of Allah، they also argued for doing the religious obligation. In Emameh`s of Baghdad School، Sheikh Mofid and SeyyedMorteza، have attributed the reason to a faculty which demands for differentiation; and reason has been described as collection of sciences by Sheikh Tousi. In this school the function of reason، practical and speculative، are accepted. Concerning the relationship between reason and Revelation، Sheikh Mofid like speakers of Kufa School and contrary to Mu`tazila، believes that reason needs Revelation while SeyyedMorteza and Sheikh Tousi do not accept such need and attachment. Both Mu`tazili and Baghdad School have not presented any argument over sacred authority as if it is supposed to be an axiom، and practically، reason is used as a source as well as an instrument.

Rationality of Faith is one of the most important issues in contemporary philosophy of Religion that most philosophers of religion have discussed it. Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne with theistic approach have discussed this subject. Swinburne with evidentialist approach concludes that religious belief like every another belief can be rational only if it has evidence and of cource theists have evidence for their belives so they are justified and rational. But Plantinga criticizes evidentialism and classical foundationalism. Instead of justification، He uses concept of Warrant and finally concludes that Christian believes have proper warrant so Christians are rational in their believes. In this project I want to survey and compare this two great thinkers ’views. My questions in this project are: 1)what criticisms Plantinga can has to Swinburne approach? 2) Is not Plantinga’s analogy argument a Kind of evidentialism? 3) Way does Plantinga use concept of Warrant instead of Justification? 4) What is difference between Warrant and Justification? 5)Are Christian believes properly warranted? 6

There are three main ideas about relation between creatures and God. One of them is the theory of separation، according to this theory there''s not any homogeneity between creatures and God it means the essence and existence of creatures are completely inhomogeneity with God''s essence and existence. The second is the theory of oneness، according to this theory creatures and God are united in their essence and in their existence، though creatures aren''t inhomogeneity with God in their degree''s existence. The third''s is theory of net unity، according to this theory creatures haven''t any reality except God''s reality though God is existence and creatures are his appearance. According to the reasonable and traditional proof the first and second theories are false and the third''s is correct.

Mulla Sadra is among the scholars presented certain criteria and principles in understanding the significations of religion language. The collection of these criteria and principles indicates his view on the religion understanding. In this study،understanding about the criteria and principles of religion language from Mulla Sadra`s view has been studied in three main domains including: special features of religion language، ontological principles، and linguistic principles. Molla sadra has studied understanding the significations of religion language according to the above- mentioned main domains. Moreover، in some cases، in the light of these criteria، an adoptive comparison has been made between Mulla sadra`s understanding method of religion language significations and other methods. In the end،we try to present a new explication on the understanding religion language based on the theory of words signification extension.

Denying God for almost 60 years، Antony Flew، the famous analytic philosopher، announced that he believes in God based on some scientific evidences. According to Flew، his conversion was happened to fulfill this principle in his life: «follow evidence، wherever it leads you». In the period of his atheism، on the basis of certain issues such as the existence of evils in the world and the meaningfulness of the religious statements، Flow challenges the views of the theists and on the basis of the presupposition of atheism put the responsibility of offering reason on their shoulders. But as regard the atheists he has the same position. Accordingly، he neither considers himself as a theist nor positive atheist. He considers his position as negative atheism. Hence his belief in the time of atheism was provisional. As a result، in the light of new findings in the field of genetics and on the basis of the principle of his reason he declared that he believes in God. But his opponents، chiefly on the basis of their prejudices، sought to consider his return from atheism as stemmed from his old age، weakness of memory، and defect of his knowledge. In this article، while referring to the basic thought of Flow in periods of atheism and theism، the authors try to carry out a critical study of the views of the opponents and prove that his conversion did not contradict his basic principle.

Followed by the emergence and growth of computers in the middle of the last century، this notion arose that these developments will lead to the point that these progresses will lead to a point at which with the same methods in the computer science، Human intelligence can be reconstructed as the artificial intelligence and computers will be able to do things that intelligent beings like humans are doing. Among computer scientists this project was famed with «Artificial intelligence» (AI)، and various theories were propounded about the feasibility of its success; wide range of opinions that significant differences exist among them، to the extent that some deny its possibility and others extremely believe that the project has succeeded so far، and even today''s computers are intelligent and they are able to think. There are two main approaches in the field of artificial intelligence «Symbolism» and «Connectionism». This article attempts in addition to explain the most common philosophical views on the relationship between mind and body، in the area of western philosophy and Islamic philosophy، evaluates the feasibility of substantiation of AI based on each of these views separately and according to two main approaches: «Symbolism» and «Connectionism».