JOURNAL OF FACULTY OF LETTERS AND HUMANITIES (TABRIZ)
Year:2008 | Volume:50 | Issue:202|Papers Count:9

This article is an attempt to confirm what Leon Robin, the well- known Platonist, asserts that Plato believes in relevance between tamathematica and the soul. That is, it tries to prove that tamathematica and the soul that permeated throughout the world are the same, as he considered the Ideas as identical with the numbers. Thus as it is not unlikely to consider the Ideas and numbers as the same so there is no logical unlikely in this case as well. For, both of them are in line with the same idea which is based on the impact of Pythagorean teachings upon Plato's thought.Moreover, we will come to know that ta mathematica are not something separate from the sensible world and the world of Ideas. The method of this work is based on using the well-known teachings of Plato, including the theory of the Ideal numbers, the doctrine of participation, the place of the soul in the world, the situation of middle affairs or ta mathematician the world and Platonic oneness of being. Meanwhile, references have been given to Plato's words and some of his early and later commentators to confirm the main theme of this article.

In the history of philosophy, Burhan-e siddiqin as a way for proving the God ftom God has singular position among proofs of God. This argument originates essentially from Holy Quran and Shi'ite Imams teachings. This Burhan prove primarily the existence of God by means of meditation on existence in itself and its essential properties. In this way, God is proved firstly and other existents are explained as consequences of His Existence. Mulla Sadra, Anselm and Descartes explicate this argument in accordance with their principles. However from the view of Kant, the famous German philosopher, all of the proofs of existence of God is eventually refer to ontological (existential) argument and this argument has a basic error. According to Kant's viewpoint ontological argument suffer from a fundamental fallacy because it consider existence as a real predicate and strive to prove God by virtue of analyzing His concept. Therefore Kant criticizes Anselm's and Descartes' ontological arguments and said that their arguments were not confident. In my view, Kant's critique of ontological argument is not involving Mulla Sadra's Burhan-e Siddiqin and his Burhan has enough capability to demonstrate a certain intellectual way for proving the existence of God. The aim of this paper is to explain the Mulla Sadra's Burhan_eSiddiqin, compare it to ontological argument of Anselmand Descartes and indicate that Kant criticism of existential argument is not involve Mulla Sadra's Burhan-e Siddiqin.

According to his theory of the unity of the existence, Ibn- e Arabi has criticized the Sufi's definition of repentance. For him every act of each existence - although regarded as an error--is God's act. Attributing the acts to every one other than God is an error and we must repent of it. Since God is the true agent, repentance in its ordinary sense is a hidden polytheism; for it requires that we presuppose the existence of the sin-i.e. act of man--and it requires in turn thee establishment of existence for man in opposition to the existence of God. So the true repentance is avoiding from independence in existence and in act. The true repentant is the man who grasps the existential return of the world to God, ever though such a person is active against God's commends. Of God's Names, one is the Acceptor of repentance; and since every name of God has an external manifestation, and God has these Names in this and other world, the man who knows God (i.e. the mystic) is a repentant forever.

In Kant's view the pure ideas of reason possesses two different functions. One of them is the impropet function of ideas that Kant calls it transcendent function when we consider an external extension for our ideas in the case of which ideas plays a regulative role. The other function is that of the proper one that Kant calls it the immanent function of ideas when ideas merely is directed towards the pure concepts of understanding and their functions in which case the role of ideas would be regulative; namely to explain the unity and consistency of knowledge stemmed from understanding. This article is an attempt to make a critical study of Kant's view concerning the role of ideas and pure principles of reason.

Many philosophers and theologians regard wittgensteinian fideism as essentially defining what his view of religionist. Significant disputes about the reading of Wittgenstein's work on religious topics arise from examining fideism. The fideist position is that religious language is intelligible only to those who participate in the religious form of life.Fully understanding the language of a religious believer is inseparable from comprehending a religious language constitutes a distinct linguistic practive which non - participants in the form of life could not grasp and show to be incoherent or erroneous. Fideism holds that the non – cognitivist account does not assist in the understanding of what religious is actually like. It offers an alternative conception of how non-cognitivism about religious language can be characterized.

We have been investigated different ideas of Richard Rorty and I result of this paper shows that he contributes some features and important properties to the western traditional philosophy which begins from Plato. Rorty criticizes these features. This investigation only refers six important features of traditional philosophy in various writings of Rorty which are very important in his philosophy. These features are: (1) escape from history,(2) being based on epistemology, (3) being base of culture, (4) being redemptive, (5) research of truth and non-human reality, (6) account of mind as mirror of nature.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is one of the most important philosophers of enlightenment period. He allocates a great emphasis on religion in his philosophy, that he considers this subject in details in his three main books. His attention to religious categories especially God's idea in his Critique of Pure Reason is negative. And by rejection the most important arguments of rational theology, he shows that our recognition cannot prove or deny God as something beyond experience, and this is the natural result of his religious consideration in his epistemology.But, he doesn't limit his religious speculation to negative aspect and describes his maxims and foundations of positive theology in other realm. In Critique of Practical Reason, he describes moral proof for the existence of God and the immortality of the soul on the basis at happiness and virtue, and so he founds religion on moral. He believes that ethical laws together with highest Good lead to religion, i.e. in which all human duties are the essential laws of every free will and, at sometime, are commands of God.So, in The Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone he describes religion according to human nature. The dualism of human nature is essential for Kant's religious point of view, and leads him from ethics moral to the religion. In fact, his religious discipline is directed to human amendment and it is a complementary to his moral discipline. This investigation attempts to determine kant's position on religion and its ethical cotents by considering human nature on the basis of his moral principles.