Journal Ontological Researches
Year:2017 | Volume:6 | Issue:11|Papers Count:8

The discovery of each philosopher's point of view within their philosophy of action, is based on "the principles of psychology" and "understanding the process of action issuance". The process of action emanation among peripatetic philosophers and theologians has been classified in some specific stages. A process that Mulla Sadra sometimes has followed and somewhere has taken and provided a different view. The basic question of this essay is to explore similarities and differences between Ibn Sina and Mulla Sadra in analyzing the process of action issuance. The result has showed that although Mulla Sadra in his conceptual analysis has accepted Avicenna’s elements of action emanation, but in his ontological analysis has represented the unity of the elements of action issuance. He, by the gradation of being to the soul faculties which has derived from the principles of the transcendental theosophy, has explained the levels of the action emanation. Accordingly, all the subjective preceding senses to the action are integrated and each sense is the same with the others ontologically.

Mulla Sadra Shirazi, by his own principles like Fundamentality of existence, existential gradation and the unity of being, believes that love equals being and explains how the love penetrates in all particles of the universe. He maintains that love is divine nature of human existence and it is full of wisdom and expediency as he considered. Although sages and Gnostics before Mulla Sadra, have written a lot about love, but Mulla Sadra's Transcendent Philosophy, has opened a specific approach to the subject in question. Mulla Sadra’s transcendent wisdom is based on principles and fundamentals which are not regarded before him as the elements of philosophical system, so he has presented a new conversation. Fundamentality of existence, existential gradation, equivalence of being with knowledge and life, substantial motion, unity of intelligence and intelligible and copula being, are some of the fundamental principles of Sadra's wisdom. This paper will examine and discuss the position of these fundamentals and their vital influences on Mulla Sadra's knowledge of love.

According to a metaphysical classification, there are two different things; particulars and universals. That which is meant by Particulars is separated and exclusive things, that is, individuals who cannot be repeatable. For example, each of us is a particular human being. Among the particulars we find some similarities which make those particulars to be classified. Every particular has some common properties and relations with the others. These common properties and relations have led to a problem called "the problem of universals”. The main question on universals is whether they are real or just a linguistic term made by human beings. Realism, Nominalism and conceptualism are the three main theories on the Universals. David Armstrong, a contemporary naturalist philosopher has introduced a new theory on universals called Scientific Realism. He, by using the term as a state of affairs in his ontology, considers particularity and universality as two sides of a state of affairs. In this paper his theory on universals will be taken into consideration.

Mir Damad was Mulla Sadra's immediate master in intellectual and traditional sciences and he undoubtedly had the greatest influence on shaping his thoughts. But a fundamental difference between their thoughts is considered by taking a glance at their books. Mulla Sadra's philosophy, not only is not the continuation of Mir Damad’s theosophy, but it is in contrast of it. The problem is: "Why Mulla Sadra has not followed the ideas of his master and established his new wisdom?" In this article, we have analyzed the basic difference between them on the question of principality of existence or quiddity. Then we showed the role of this difference on the other their philosophical thought. That which is meant by Islamic existentialist is the external reality consists of a single thing which is called the "being or existence" But according to Islamic essentialist the universe consists of various facts that is called "quiddity or essences".

Discussion on substance and body as one of the substances is the important subject in peripatetic philosophy. Most philosophers believe that there are five substances including the intellect and the soul and body, matter and the form. Additionally, the body is composed of matter and form, the combination of body from matter and form is concrete. Suhrawardi also, in some of his works as one of the five substances claims that the body composed of matter and form, but in others only three substances, that is, intellect and soul and body have been accepted when the body is concerned as a simple. Mulla Sadra in spite of his predecessors has taken a different point of view. Moreover, he despite Suhrawardi has regarded the body as one of the five substances and despite the Peripatetic philosophers also has considered the composition of matter and form an unified one. This article by reviewing Sohrwardi’s perspectives and Mulla Sadra’s critics has studied and analyzed their different approaches.

Positivist approach to the modern science, has considered the experience as an exclusive research method in the natural sciences. This approach has been accepted generally over recent centuries, so that the progress of the natural sciences was in debt to this approach. This doctrine was challenged in the second half of the twentieth century, some philosophers of science as well as the social scientists tried to show the role of assumptions and the impact of non-empirical factors in modern natural sciences, nowadays, the Renaissance image of science as a pure experimental, has lost its validity. In this article we have tried to derive some ontological pre suppositions of the modern natural sciences, such as the principality of quantity, simplicity and Materialism. At the same time, it was shown that firstly, despite scientists’ claims that the science based on the observation and experiment, non-empirical assumptions also have played a strong role in the natural sciences. Secondly, despite some common elements which are between the modern and pre modern natural sciences, such as the principle of causality and the cosmological principle, there are certain differences between the basis upon which modern science cannot be considered a continuation of the pre modern physics and modern paradigm with its one-sided and materialistic approach, has ignored some aspects of the universe. So to put natural science in its proper place, it is necessary to reflect and revise these pre assumptions.

Al-Wāḥid is one of the oldest and most controversial philosophical principles, which always faced so many agreements and disagreements, particularly by theologians. Depending on different definitions of its conceptual origins, the referents and applications have been changed and applied to prove unity of First intellect to plurality of soul faculties. Its opponents have regarded that as a violation of God’s Absolute efficient, omnipotence and will. In the meantime, there are certain expressions in some Suhrawardī and Mullā Ṣadrā’s works -who advocate the principle- which require that, the principle should be denied or revised basically. It should be noted that some of Islamic philosophers have supported the principle as a strong foundation and original axiom. Through rethinking some origins of the principle, we can review and criticize its proofs to show that the other proofs should be required to advocate the theory in which just one immediate entity has been issued from God.

Undoubtedly, there are many evils including: bad events, ignorance, earthquakes, floods, corruptions and so on, in the world in which we live. Evil is one of the most important issues in the philosophy, especially in the metaphysics and that is why, the philosophers and thinkers have always thought about it and tried to explain it. Among them, Plato, one of the great and influential Greek philosophers has presented a special view which later has been considered as the theory of ' evil is non-existential'. In this essay, it has been intended to find about what is meant by non-existential' of evil in Plato’s doctrine, trying to examine and understand Plato's theory of evil. To achieve this goal, by resorting to Plato's own writings, first of all, I have attempted to indicate that he considered evil as an existential thing. Secondly, I have tried to explain that his theory of evil has to be understood in the light of his theory of forms. Moreover, I have tried to explain the origin of evil in the world according to Plato’s.