JOURNAL OF FACULTY OF LETTERS AND HUMANITIES (TABRIZ)
Year:2005 | Volume:48 | Issue:194|Papers Count:14

Plato’s circular proof for immortality of the soul after death is presented by a mythical philosophical expression, while it is based on "an ancient doctrine" about "circle of successive birthes" and appeals to the principle of  "raising the opposites from each other", which has been current in Hellenic culture from Hesiodus to Plato. This proof, in spite of its defects; is used by Plato as the first proof of immortality of the soul, and he believes that it briefly proves the immortality.

The role and significance of "antinomies of pure reason" in critical philosophy are indisputable. In this paper, I have explained the antinomies that appear in rational cosmology. Moreover I have added some remarks on their origin and their solutions.

There has been various interpretations about the origin and evolution of our world in different philosophical frameworks. “Faaeliiat Belreza” agency by agreement is one of the interpretations which has been offered by Sohravardi. This article tries to answer the following question: "What's the relationship between God and world in philosophical & mystical thought"? Moreover, this article expounds the foundations of Sohravardi philosophical system (Philosophy of Ishragh) and its connection with his thesis on God's agency in the world of creation, and illuminates divine attributes such as divine knowledge of his will & his power, that all of them are essential, not accidental. In addition, we will in this paper the Sohravardi rejects the Avicenna's theory of God's agency, Favor Agency (Faael Belenayat).  

In philosophy, idealism has two meanings. First as objective or metaphysical idealism versus naturalism, and second as subjective or epistemological idealism versus epistemological realism. Idealism in the former sense concerns the priority of spirit over matter or spiritualism, while in the latter it implies the refutation of materiality of the objects of sensual knowledge. Out of objective idealism and naturalism, Muslim philosophers put forward a third view. On the one hand, they accept the reality of material beings, and on the other, some of them, like Sohravardi and Mulla Sadra, though different from Plato, accepted the existence of the Ideas. In the realm of epistemology, Muslim philosophers are realists; that is, the subjective idealism is denied by them. Their confrontation with subjective idealism was initially started by criticizing sophistry and then, appeared in Tabatabaei and Muthahhari and Mesbah,s works in the form of criticizing sophistry and idealistic thought and defending realistic foundations of Islamic philosophy in the field of knowledge

Present article is a report about Mahdism and continuity of sainthood from Sohravardi’s point of view. To do so, at first we represent triple versions of Mahdism and, based on these versions, we consider the historical process of this problem in Islamic philosophy. Then, through presenting Sohravardi’s ideas regarding prophecy and sainthood and his arguments about necessity and continuity of sainthood in all times, we come to the conclusion that his version of Mahdism is very close to that of Sufis. Finally, the necessity of belief in continuity of sainthood and legal and ontological benefits of saint in Sohravardi’s philosophy will be discussed.

The doctrine of original sin is a very famous doctrine for Christians, both Catholics and protestants. The main message of doctrine is embarrassment of human race because of the sin committed by Adam when he was in heaven. This doctrine provides a justification for salvatory mission of Juses Christ. Its defenders refer to Gospel, especially to Poul writings. St. Augustin played an important part in development of the doctrine. But this theory has had its own opponents also, most important of them is Plagious. Since Plagious time, disagreement with the theory has been continued. But Christian church in different cases and different councils, like Orange, Cartage, and Terent councils, has insisted on correctness of the doctrine and has called the opponents heretics. This article deals with this theory, its main contents and its defenders and opponents.

The purpose of this paper is to assess Karl Raymond Popper’s “Criterion for Demarcation between Science and Pseudoscience”. Here based on critiques of Larry Laudan, Imere lakatos, Thomas Kuhn, Harold Brown, and W. W. Bartley about the Criterion, new critiques about the demarcation theory are proposed. Criticizing the logical consequences of Popper is the model adopted in this study. In this assessment, Popper’s conventions for defining “Science”, is divided into three stages and every stage, in turn, is criticized.