Wisdom and Philosophy
Year:2015 | Volume:11 | Issue:3 (43)|Papers Count:6

Evaluating and considering of immateriality and immortality by three philosophers naming Aristotle's (322-384 H.Q), Avicenna (370-428 H.Q), and Aviross (520-595 H.Q) constituted the core of this article. Contradiction and ambiguities seen in some of Aristotle's ideas is considered as the origin of the differences of his exponents about this matter. Philosophers such as Alexander Aphrodisias and (2 and 3 BC), Aviross attributed materiality and mortality of individuals’ souls and also Avicenna attributed immateriality and immortality to Aristotle. Some definitions of Aristotle on soul based on immateriality and immortality as well as his emphasis on soul simplicity is an expression of accurate viewpoint of Avicenna, not related to Aviross. Avicenna relying on the lack of dividing the location of intelligible forms and also according to personal science of self-esteem proves personal souls immateriality and survival of them. But, Aviross was not able to prove the personal souls immateriality based on the unity of intellect course and the relation of potential intellect and active intellect and eventually, then did not consider them as immaterial and one.

The transfer of necessity principle (the consequen of a necessary issue, is necessary itself) is seen as the base of consequent argument vindicating the belief of incompatibility of free will with causal determinism. The fixity of deterministic laws dominating natural events and inevitable past accompanied by the transfer of necessity principle lead us to conclude that all events including those called human’s freely done actions are determined and inevitable. The current study, drawing on the important role of the transfer of necessity principle for incompatibility account is an attempt to review this principle. To this aim, we, at first, explain causal determinism and consequent argument. Then, following the perceiving the meaning of necessity upon incompatibilist view, we analyze the transfer of necessity principle. And finally we want to show how much the principle of necessity is bearable against the opposite counterexamples as well as with what interpretation is capable of responding to counterexamples and can be employed for consequent argument.

Moral issues are studied in the three realms of metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Utilitarianism is one of the important view in normative ethics. J.J.C. Smart is one of the most distinguished act-utilitarian whose thoughts are highly influenced by Sidgwick’ ideas. Smart has tried to answer two current criticisms leveled against utilitarianism, i.e. the conflict with moral intuitions and the difficulties of calculating the consequences of actions. Thus, first he denies the epistemological validity of moral intuitions and adopts a noncognitivist approach. In some cases that fulfillment of utilitarian action results in conflict with moral intuitions, he appeals to distinction between the context of theory and the context of action. In order to remove the problem of calculating, he benefits from games theory and application of mixed strategy as well as the axiom of ripples on the pond. In this essay, following the presentation of the theoretical foundation of smart’s idea, some criticism will be levelled and finally his answers to them will be evaluated.

In this essay the relation of questioning with holy affair in Moulavi’s reflective poem will be discussed in an analytic manner. At first, Moulana's worldview in a general approach on source, position, limits, capacity and properties of knowledge levels and then the states of sciences, techniques, and human arts and philosophical and rational methods and necessity for using the mentioned subjects not only in mundane life, even sometimes as a means for salvation in that world are studied while Moulavi grants undeniable privileges to mystical insight and intuition from revelatory source.In the area of holy affair, Moulavi while pointing on detriments and disadvantages of using human knowledge in this area and necessity for suitability and relation between tool and subject studied emphasizes the ineffectiveness of questioning in this area and necessity for patience with holy and revelatory presence of perfect man and magnificentQur' an which are viewed as mediators between human and God and connected to divine source and have infallibility privilege.

In their meta-ethical views known as constructivism and prescriptivism respectively, John Rawls and Richard Mervin have criticized the traditional views toward objectivity from an anti-realistic position. Both thinkers reject the existence of the moral facts existing in the outside world independent of the moral subject; they are also against the intuitionism as a representative of this conception of objectivity. Yet, these two thinkers introduce themselves as the believers of the objectivity of moral principles. They believe that verifiability and falsifiability, universalizability, and the possibility of the moral reasoning are among the requirements of the objectivity in ethics and that their views meet such requirements. These requirements are fulfilled by the key functions of "impartiality' " and "justice" in Rawls' theory and by the emphasis on "putting oneself in others' position" in Hare's view. To avoid subjectivity, therefore, they argue for another conception of objectivity of which the characteristic feature is totality and generality originated from Kant's thoughts. These two views are anti-realistic, but Rawls' theory has the features of both cognitivism and descriptivism; unlike Hare who is anti-cognitivist and anti-descriptivist. The purpose of the present essay is the study of the similarities and differences of these two views to objectivity in ethics.

The French phenomenological philosopher, Maurice Merleu-Ponty, tried to understand art works and related concepts taking recourse to phenomenological approach. In the new point, he tried to understand art by emphasizing on the being- in-the-world relying on perception’s term and its relation to art. Based on the some of the concepts such as intentionality, living experiences, art style, establishing and etc. Merleu-Ponty wants to conceive a new interpretation from art. The museum is essential in Merleu-Pontyꞌs thoughts since it has deeply related with art affairs with relying on its history.The main question of this article is that how relation between lived experiences and museum is. Based on Merleu-Pontyꞌs vital philosophy, this article concerns phenomenologically to critic the role of museum and indicates that the meaning of phenomenological establishing and storing is different from what is aiming in museum. This study targets the questions of how much honest are the museums in storing as well as how much this honesty is influenced by the social and cultural elements.