مجله فلسفه علم
سال چهارم شماره 1 (پیاپی 7، بهار و تابستان 1393)

should be corresponded to the reality، in Mullasadra’s view the correspondence and non-correspondence is an acquired knowledge. He believes that essence is the intermediary between subject and object، which has the same existence in the both sides. The drawbacks of the theory indicate that he could not demonstrate the correspondence between subject and object. Besides، according to the priority of existence and the gradation of existence، one can propose the sameness of objective existence theory، according to which knowledge is the higher existence of known essence.

The view that one''s observations are depended on his/her epistemological network and are flexible due to trainings and expectations، is a long-lasting view which has a special place in the philosophy of science. The opposite view says that there is an impenetrable layer in observation which is resistant to influence of any educational and epistemological structure. In this paper، we first present these views according to Churchland and Fodor، the main figures in the camps respectively. Second، more importantly، we will defend a more moderate view which is based on a graded account of observation. The latter view accepts rigidity in the level of sensation while acknowledges that observation is flexible in higher levels. According to this view there is no need to appeal to flexibility of sensations to explain why there are discrepancies in observational reports and judgments.

The notion of pluralism has developed and expanded through the paradigmatic evolution of modern knowledge; Paradigm’s elements changing have caused paradigm shifts and through these shifts، from the objectivist paradigms to relativist paradigm، and critical and combined approaches، the notion of pluralism has developed and formulated and interpreted differently in each of these different approaches. During the course of positivism، pluralism growth conditions have been provided negatively. pluralism`s seed placed in the context of modernism in post positivism period، and developed in critical rationalism course and finally became a robust seedlings in dominance of relativism period. Through the study of knowledge paradigmatic evolution in the West civilization، we can conclude that as the tendency to realistic ontology، absolutist epistemology and quantitative methodology become more we encounter concepts like ‘Centralism’، ‘Holism’، ‘Fundamentalism’، ‘Principalism’، ‘Absolutism’ and ‘Epistemic Dogmatism’ more. So the intensity of commitment to the concept of modern pluralism reduced. On the other hand، as tendency to Idealist ontology، subjective or relativistic epistemology and qualitative methodologies intensifies، some concepts such as ‘Decentralism’، ‘Partial vision’، ‘Destructurim’، ‘Plurality believe’، ‘Relativism’ and ‘Epistemological Skepticism’ are appeared more. So the same result is the case; the commitment to the concept of modern pluralism lessened.

Salmon claims that explanation is an objective affair، and is nothing more than descriptive knowledge of the world. A criterion which Salmon provides for causal explanation as scientific explanation has two foundations: 1. Statistical Relevance; 2. Causal relation. In this paper، first، we will argue that the explanation includes both objective and subjective components and scientists use inference to the best explanation. Second، we will state that causation is an intellectual and philosophical affair so that necessity of causal relation is its result. Therefore there is no ontological status for the probabilistic approach of causality.

Cosmology started as a common ground for philosophy، religion، and science. In the Islamic culture، cosmology was either based on creation ex nihilo (the view of theologians) or on old universe (the view of philosophers)، and the problem of multiverse was not mentioned so much. After the introduction of the so-called ‘anthropic principle’ in the early 1970’s، the idea of multiverse entered the realm of cosmology. There were two views among earlier Muslim thinkers concerning the creation of the universe. Muslim theologians believed in the temporal creation of the universe، but Muslim philosophers predominantly believed that our universe is temporally old. As far the uniqueness or multiplicity of universe of the created universe is concerned، there were different views about this among Muslim scientists، philosophers and theologians. Here we mention several views concerning the multiplicity of the universe among some well-known Muslim scholars.

Kuhn’s world change claim has some problems; whether this change is an objective change (change in the world itself) or a subjective one (change in the mind)? Does objective ‘world change’ conform to the stability of sense stimulus? Whether subjective change is compatible with the incommensurability of perceptions of rival paradigms? Kuhn through his Darwinian- Kantian framework argues for the priori conditions of world perceiving and changing. As we will see، these conditions are the taxonomic structure of paradigms. We will argue that Kuhn can speak of the change of world itself in a commonsensical manner.

Allan Franklin is a contemporary physicist and philosopher who take some sort of extremist opinion about the experiments in physics and the position of social constructivism. Proposing a philosophical model، which we call ‘Pragmatist Rationality’، Franklin wants to defend of a kind of logic of scientific discovery and the possibility of crucial experiments occurring and through which He wants to rebut the contingency thesis which is a vital characteristic of social constructivism. Although he denies that he is proposing a kind of theory of rationality، such theory is evident throughout his works. In this paper we review and evaluate his claims and are going to measure its soundness compared to the contemporary social constructivism theories.