تاریخ فلسفه
سال:1391 | دوره:2 | شماره:4 (پیاپی 8) |تعداد مقالات:12

This paper intends to provide an analysis of Whitehead's view of substance in its traditional or Aristotelian sense based on his process cosmological principles. According to this analysis, he sees the roots of modern scientific materialism in Aristotelian substance and, following this, replaces the concept of substance with the concept of actual being within the framework of his own philosophy. The important point is that this does not mean his total rejection of substance. In fact, we can say that, on the one hand, Whitehead has a negative view of substance in the sense that he sees it inconsistent with his own cosmological principles from an ontological point of view and rejects it. On the other hand, he has a positive view of substance and considers it useful for common purposes of life in linguistic and practical respects. Therefore, it is concluded that, although Whitehead has seriously criticized Aristotelian substance and even substituted it with another concept, he has not totally rejected it.

Man has always had a mythological view of the universe. The birth and death of the world constitute the dimensions of this view. Teleology has always played an important role in the quality of man's view of being and its philosophy. This problem has also attracted serious attention in contemporary philosophical schools.This paper focuses on the mythological roots of this dimension of human thought and tries to analyze the different roots and forms of the annual renewal of the universe in the mythology of the Middle East as well as the consequences of this tradition for the quality of contemporary man's attitude to life.In order to find the roots of this problem, the writers have initially studied its relationship with the creation of the universe and, then, with history, mythology, and different historical interpretations. They have also reviewed the various human beliefs and traditions for escaping from history (the annual revival of the universe and the periodical revival of the universe) as instances of this effort. They have also concluded that in this renewal belief this responsibility was on the shoulders of certain divine beings, then the king, and then the Storm Hero.Finally, the writers compare the story of Noah's Storm with other myths of the Middle East, such as the similar Sumerian, Babylonian, and Hebrew narratives as well as with soothsayers' stories.

Farabi's virtuous city (Medina fadilah) in Islamic political philosophy is usually compared with Plato's utopia. If this comparison in relation to Farabi's founding of "political philosophy" is correct, the study of this point, which was developed in the middle period of Islam, can illuminate the reasons of the failures witnessed more recently in Islamic countries. The purpose of the writer in this paper is to explore the effect of Plato's political philosophy on the authoritarian design of the Muslim philosopher's virtuous city through a text-oriented explanation of Farabi's political philosophy following a comparative method of analysis. In other words, unlike those who have commonly tried to forefront some of the religious aspects of his newly founded science because of his being a Muslim, the writers of this paper, by assuming the existence of a philosophical basis for the ideas of the Second Teacher, seek its original roots in Platonic ideas. That is why the distinctive feature of this paper is avoiding the modern and traditional ideological terminologies in order to demonstrate or reject the absolute truth of Farabi's ideas.

In the philosophies of Mulla Sadra and Tusi, the intellect is the most supreme faculty of the soul, and intellectual knowledge is the highest level of knowledge. Both of them agree that rationality is the most fundamental of all human characteristics, with the difference that the main criterion for Mulla Sadra is theoretical rationality, while for Tusi it is practical rationality. The present paper is devoted to a comparative study of the two concepts of the intellect and knowledge from the viewpoints of these two philosophers.Although Tusi believed in the relationship between the rational soul and the Active Intellect and considered it as the mediator of the soul's moving from potency to actuality, he does not accept its union with the Active Intellect. However, Mulla Sadra stipulates that the human rational soul unites with the actual intellect and maintains that the perception of this problem, like believing in the union of the intellect and the intelligible, is a divine gift. He has faith in the unity of human intellect and is also aware of the nature of knowledge and its end and subject. In fact, his belief in the connection of sciences and their correlation in certain aspects is rooted in the same awareness. Mulla Sadra believes that the reality of knowledge is the same as existence, as knowledge means the appearance of known things and their affixation in souls or minds. Unlike Tusi, he considers perception and knowledge as a kind of a multi-level and graded existence and argues that all of its levels and grades, including sense perception, imaginal perception, and intellectual perception, are immaterial. In his view, the intellect consists of all intelligible things. In contrast, Tusi maintains that in acquired knowledge man's relationship with the external object is through the form developed in the human mind. However, Mulla Sadra is of the view that, like ignorance, knowledge is divided into simple and compound types. Through referring knowledge to being and existence, he has transformed the domain of the common disagreements concerning the quid dative nature of knowledge.

After the Mongol's Attack, the centers for science and culture were transferred from Khorasan and Transoxiana to Shiraz. As a result, this region was considered to be the main center of Islamic philosophy before Mulla Sadra, which presented such great figures as Qutb al-Din Shirazi, Mir Seyyed Sharif Jurjani, Muhaqqiq Dawani, and the family of Dashtaki. The present research, while introducing the philosophical characteristics of the School of Shiraz and the ideas of the thinkers associated with it, examines the relationship between the philosophical principles of this school with those of Mulla Sadra's Transcendent Philosophy and the quality of the effects the great thinkers of the school of Shiraz exercised on the development of the philosophical principles of the Transcendent Philosophy. Finally, it explains why many of the elements and principles of this school of philosophy are rooted in the theoretical foundations of the School of Shiraz. The most obvious instance of this point is the combination of the principles of Peripatetic and Illuminationist philosophies in the Transcendent Philosophy.