JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH
Year:2009 | Volume:10 | Issue:2 (38)|Papers Count:10

An important concern of the devout as well as the scholars of religion has been the unveiling of the intended meanings of religious texts. As to the Koran and the Bible, since Christians and Muslims consider them as the revelatory word, many interpreters have sought some meanings beyond the literal meanings of single words, propositions, and narratives. So there have been utilized different polysemic models in interpreting the Bible from a long time ago, especially from the Middle Ages. Also, polysemy has been used in interpretation of the Koran through different devices such as esoteric exegesis, manifest meaning, inner meaning, final exoteric meaning, final non-manifest, announced expressions, allusions, subtle things and also truths. Presenting different types of polysemic models in the various domains including logic, literature, and interpretation, the essay is going to investigate into the polysemic models of interpreting the Koran and the Bible, to compare those models, and finally to deal with the evaluation of them.

Religious faith can be thought and analyzed reasonably from different aspects and dimensions. One of them is the emotional dimension, discussed by some thinkers, among whom is William James, the American famous philosopher. Dealing with this dimension in some of his writings, especially in "The Will to Belief, James clarifies the difference between religious beliefs as well as criticizes the views of Evidentialism. He shows that rationality of religious fait1l cannot be damaged by interfering of will and emotional feelings. The paper presents an analytical account of James' viewpoint in this regard.

Precise discussions of philosophers about the types of unity and multiplicity prepared the ground for presentiqg different viewpoints on the unity and multiplicity of existence. One of these viewpoints belongs to the eminent scholar Dawwani, according to whom unity is demanded by "tasting of theosophy". Dawwani's position has been the object of Mulla Sadra's different criticisms. Reviewing in detail the structure of the theory of tasting of theosophy, and looking in more detail at the objections presented by philosophers specifically Mulla Sadra, the paper seeks to re-read the significant of Dawwani's viewpoint as well as to draw the similarities between his viewpoint and mystics' standpoint.

From a long time ago, happiness has been one of the basic questions of morality and moral philosophy, and it has been paid attention by thinkers of different ethical perspectives. According to AI-Farabi, happiness is divided into two types: real and unreal. In his view, real happiness is not a simple concept but is a complex one, which is goal of goals, goodness for itself, absolute goodness, and perfect end, and whose pleasure is intellectual and enduring. He suggests that three elements of free will, speculative faculty of speech, and common nature are only necessary prerequisites, rather than sufficient conditions; in fact, realization of happiness needs programming. Also, from his viewpoint, real happiness is an analogous entity, whose highest stage is existential nearness to God. The recent point in his opinions indicates that he was under the influential of religious sources.

Ibn sina and Thomas Aquinas, two prominent figures in Muslim and Christian worlds, are among the most influential philosophers in medieval ages. Having got to know the peripatetic philosophy on the basis of Ibn Rushd's and Ibn Sina's Commentary, of the Aristotelian philosophy, Thomas proceeded to establish a Christian philosophical system. In spite of taking much advantage of Ibn Sina, Thomas disagreed with some of Ibn Sina's philosophical opinions and attempted to criticize them, due to al-Gazali's criticisms on philosophy. One case of the disagreement is the question of coming-into-being and eternity of the world. The present paper is going to evaluate Ibn Sina's and Aquinas's views and to make it clear that Aquinas's objections are deficient, and that his responses fail to be convincing.

Among main discussions of Islamic Philosophy is the how of emerging the multiple existents or the diverse things caused from the single source, technically known as the connection of multiplicity to unity. On the basis of belief in foundations such as principle of Divine unity, His causality, absolute agency of God, the principle of al-Wahid (from Unity only unity can issue forth), gradation of existence as well as the theory of nobler possibility, some Islamic philosophers seek to explain the relationship between multiple existents and the single ultimate cause. The most significant philosophical attitude in this regard is the theory of "secondary causes of existence" or "secondary causes of emanation" discussed by Muslim philosophers, specifically Mulla Sadra. The author in this paper attempts to explain the theory of secondary causes, enumerate its basic principles, elucidate the arguments-for, and finally to response some major doubts.

Sheik al-Mofid, who is a renowned Shi'a philosopher and theologian, uses reason and argument not only in the discursive Kalam, but also in traditional discussions, particularly, in understanding and criticism of the content of Hadiths. He regards reason as one of the criteria of criticism and maintains that in the light of reason, one can realize the authenticity or unsoundness of a Hadith. In his view, the agreement between the Hadith's significant and the reason is the indicator of authenticity of the Hadith, and also its disagreement with the reason is the sign of weakness or unsoundness of the Hadith. Concerning the understanding of Hadiths, the role of reason is a discovering function so that reason can be used both as a source and as an instrument. The present paper explores Sheik al-Mofid's taking advantage of reason in understanding matters such as the meaning of words, removal of the exoteric meaning's power, the interpretation of text, the specification of the generalities in the Koran and traditions, and also the implications of speech.

Most of contemporary thinkers of ethics hold that sport is most influential in both individual and social developments; also, sport in every society reflects the culture of society, and at the same it overshadows cultural, economic, and political problems. Among the problem, one can say that "morals in sports" is a topic which is less dealt with in different societies, including our own society. Surely, what beautifies a sporting event is the manifestation of moral values in relation to rules, rivals, spectators, and officials. At the same time, what persuades a sportsman or sportswoman to observe the values is the presentation of fair game, a subject which needs more discussions. In this article, the authors attempt to examine the attitude of fair game, the interaction between sports and morality and some moral problems in specific fields.

Freedom, in spite of misuses of it, can be regard as one of the concepts which is prevalent as a positive concept in different countries and cultures so that everyone is attached to it, and is ready to bestow his most valuable capitals to gain it. Despite such a regard of affection for it, freedom as "free will" in human nature and as "human rights" in society is still in an annulation of ambiguity for thinkers of different domains. This paper, while relying on human intelligence as the reason of free will, considers intelligence as the shackle of human freedom. Based on this point and using a philosophical-theological approach, the paper is going to deal with free will in human nature as well as with freedom in society.