فصلنامه حکمت و فلسفه
سال دهم شماره 4 (پیاپی 40، زمستان 1393)

Philosophical conclusions from Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics including the rejection of realism، negation of causality and Lack of determination on nuclear or atomic events and etc، lead to a gap or twofoldness between classical and Quantum physics. In this article، we will show this gap and there is an attempt to offer responses to major claims of Copenhagen school based on Popper’s falsificationism، its tools and attributes. We also contend that the mentioned gap can be restored with an appropriate philosophical interpretation and Once again، we can return unity to the philosophy of physics.

“Modernity; unfinished project” has been one of the most effective articles of the world during the recent three decades and it has been the source of controversis in many different fields of though. But the main question is: Why this paper is so important? And what lessons can be learned from it for writing of scientific articles? Although، the article contains many thought-provoking and informative notes but its prose is in some places، concise، ornate and difficult. It is translated about a decade ago into Persian، and apparently has been done quickly and with little accuracy. Perhaps that is why it needs serious revision with the emergence of many Habermas'' sociological and philosophical backgrounds. Therefore، the first purpose of this paper is to provide a conceptual abstract and as much as possible، an accurate and faithful summary of article using two English translations and (when necessary) referring to the original German article. Then، it showes that why this article is important technically by analyzing and abstraction of “Questions”، “ideas”، “theorems” and “assumptions” and how it can provide Criteria for effective، scientific and philosophical writing.

This article is a comparative study between the ideas of Hassan Hanafi، and Mohammed Arkoun. Hanafi is including Islamic innovators who criticizes Islamic tradition and Western civilization for liberation Muslims of The degeneration and also provide a solution for the future of Islamic societies. He believes that the full adherence to Western models for Compensation of Muslims Backwardness of is not helpful and the distance between theory and practice in the Muslim world has increased and the only way to save the Muslims from degenerating is the link between Islamic theory and practice. Mohammed Arkoun as another of Islamic prominent neo-thinkers criticizes Islamic tradition because of its nature of the non-historicity and he doesn''t know Western secularism as a complete model for Muslim societies due to ignore the religious dimension. Arkoun offers his solution in the form of historic Islamic ideas that his suggestion can open a way to criticize the Islamic tradition by highlighting the rationally aspects of Islam religion. Hanafi Hassan and Mohammed Arkoun jointly use of Islamic tradition criticism and Western Civilization in order to responding to this question: What should we do for emancipation of degeneration?

After Being and Time، Heidegger always connects his principal philosophical terms such as Dasein، metaphysics and nihilism، etc. to words like “european’’، “western’’ and “West’’. In this way، he turns his philosophical termes into a discourse about the Western. As well as، Heidegger often had dealt with Spengler''s the decline of the West in his early lectures in the beginning of second decade of the last century. These indicate subject matter of «the West-problem’’ in his philosophy. On the other hand، Heidegger is in conversation with the Far East، especially after the Second World War.، a dialogue that he speaks about them in his main philosophical themes like Being، nothingness، Dasein، metaphysics، etc. However، his relationship with East Asia was bygone and returns to early of second decade of the last century. These instances indicate subject matter of “the East-problem’’ in his philosophy too. In addition، both mentioned problems are interwined. Therefore، it must be understood together in a matter of “East and West’’. This article attempt to show Heidegger''s major philosophical themeswith a brief mention to the extent of the relationship between unified subject of east and west together which reflects the thinking of this great thinker and hence it should be considered as the basis of understanding and interpretation of Heidegger''s thinking. But the centrality of the West-East-Problem in no way contradicts the question of being، that Heidegger declared as the main subject of his philosophy، because it also is associated with Heidegger''s question. For this reason، this question can also be asked as question from him.

Feeling and Imagination are very important in the thought of Descartes. Descartes categorizes or classified feeling and imagination as state of consciousness under the modes of the thinking thing، without having any relation to external objects. Then، in Sixth Meditation، he Seeks help from these two forces for proving of Physical character (or Man-e jesmani) and presented them as a forces that realize they need physical and corporeal activity. Therefore، they are two forces that are not purely subjective (mental) or purely physical، but we can have them in the unity of mind and body and as a human beings composed from mind and body. Indeed، in discussing of feelings and imagination، Descartes tries to prove material or corporality in general and human bodies specially and he wants to explain how mind and body interact with different substances too. But it seems that his talk about these two forces or power is not compatible with his famous mind-body dualism system. In study and review of works of Some of the commentators Descarte''s thoughts like Gary Hatfield، Bernard Williams، Margaret Dauler Wilson and Catherine Wilson، we Found that They more or less have discussed about feelings and imagination in the philosophical system of Descartes. But despite the importance of the issue in the thought of Descartes، they have passed from it briefly. Among these، John Katyngm، of the three-volume English translation of Descartes works and the owner of numerous works on Descartes thought system، more than any other commentators، is noted to feeling and imagination In the philosophy of Descartes And he Has noted different views and voted than other Descartes experts. In this article we try to show the place of feelings and imagination in the philosophy of Descartes and linking this issue with Descartes Dualism، according to the works of Descartes And referring to the vote of some commentators his works and somehow it will be shown Highlights of votes Katyngm than Other analysts or commentators.

We believe that everyone consciousness from himself is infallible while human consciousness from other things or even consciousness of other people to him is not infallible. How can explain this asymmetry? The most common response is usually based on the Locke''s Cartesian explanation. Initially، we reduce this explanation in to four hypotheses. We believe that everyone consciousness from himself is infallible while human consciousness from other things or other people''s consciousness to him is not infallible. How can explain this asymmetry? The most common response is usually based on the Locke''s Cartesian explanation. Initially، we reduce this explanation into four hypotheses and then we will show that why can (or should) we are looking for an alternative explanation. Finally، we will provide an alternative explanation with reliance on the views of the later Wittgenstein، which based on that، belief in the infallibility of human in the consciousness of itself returns only to a linguistic presupposition which prepares us to interpret our words.

There is a basic subject about how do human achieve to common and proved facts that Augustine has faced withal in his epistemological topics. He explained the problem by using Illumination theory. His equivocal phrases in explaining the meaning and content of illumination mainly makes faces addressee with this subject whether the illumination is an intellect''s natural ability in understanding from the perspective of Augustine or refers to intervention of divine precept out of mind in the human perception? In this article، we have tried to examine Gilson interpretation as one of the most important Augustine exponents by referring to the different views on the interpretation of the theory of illumination. Gilson believes that Augustine has emphasized on both sides Inherent ability of reason and Illuminative divine action in process of recognition.