KNOWLEDGE (JOURNAL OF HUMAN SCIENCES)
Year:2009 | Volume:- | Issue:59/1|Papers Count:8

In Greek Philosophy "being" or "what really is" is in relation to form. In fact, being, substance and form usually have the same meaning and we can speak of metaphysics of form in this philosophy. The thinkers of the early Middle Ages - the fifth to twelfth centurie - followed the Greeks in this subject, even if they spoke of Being (esse) and not only of being (to on, ens). However, for them being was with form and substance. These thinkers, like the Greeks, did not consider Being as the subject of philosophy. They were theologians whose principal concern was the knowledge of God and explained their beliefs and doctrine of faith by using Greek philosophy. For a full discussion about Being and is distinction from essence we have to wait for the translation of Avicenna's works into Latin in the twelfth century.

In respect to its contents, al-Farabi's Kitab at-jam’ bayn ra’yay al-hakimayn aflatun al-ilahi wa-Aristutalis (On the Agreement between Plato and Aristotle) is very different from his other works and from those of other Muslim philosophers as well. The exact study of this book can help us obtain a vast prospect on al-farabi's philosophy. It is not possible to achieve this goal, unless we try to explain the relation of Uthulugia (Theologia Aristotelis), which was ascribed to Aristotle in the middle Ages, and al-Farabi’s Kitab al-jam, In today’s Islamic philosophical studies, which are dominated by an orientalist approach, al-Farabi’s Kitab al-jam’is recognized as the product of a pseudonymous work, Theology of Aristotle. However, when we came to know that Theology of Aristotle does not play a basic role in authorship of Kitab al-jam, then we may raise an important question. Why did Al-Farabi write the Kitab al-Jam'?

Martin Heidegger has defined Dasein (i.e. a co-term for being in the world) as creature that enjoys existential worries as its salient feature. This fundamental feature has led it to existential questions, which have been the focal point of its existentialist thoughts. However, which one of Dasein's possibilities provides better opportunities to confront the world? Heidegger has introduced "death" as the most special possibility of Dasein. The present study is an attempt to explain lucidly Heidegger's implicit statements on ontological interpretation of death. The author examines the ontological facets of these visions in any references to the fivefold visions of death in the way defined by Heidegger. In his opinian, death is ontological and existential. In Heidegger's view, all research and questions, which examine death from biological, psychological, and terminological perspectives, in terms of method analysis are analyzed existentially. This is a different interpretation of death that reflects authentic existence. By recourse to this interpretation as a final possibility, which destroys all other alternatives, finds a way to the authentic existence? The existential imminence of death warps the perception of death and is estranged from pathology, conventionality, and ethnography. In addition, this. Study is a search to formally uncover the Heidegger's ontological concepts of visions of death and to compare those beliefs with "Being with" ontic ones - a term coined by Heidegger.

Wittgenstein considered that the notion of a private language rested on two fundamental mistakes: one about the nature of experience, and one about the nature of language. The former is the belief that experience is private; the latter is the belief that words can acquire meaning by ostensive definition. The so-calledp: private language argument" establishes that the speaker of the language would be left with no way to distinguish between seeming right and being right; i.e, nobody other than the speaker could understand it and nothing could be recognized as a word of such a language to refer to a thing. In this paper, we first discuss 243-258 of the Philosophical Investigations in order to find a comprehensive and truthful reading of the argument. Then we present a comparative discussion of some of his commentator's explanations. Our discussion shows that Kenny's reading of Wittgenstein should be seen as the most reliable and coherent readings.

The relation between language and morality is usually described by focusing on the fact that what we say could be right or wrong. Emmanuel Levinas claims that the relation is much more fundamental in that language is essentially connected with morality (to use Levinas’s term).This paper shows the way in which Levinas, by distinguishing the said (Ie dit) from the saying (Ie dire), explores the basic relation according his otherregarding philosphy.Also the paper demonstrates that Levinasian reduction (reducing the said to the saying) is an original way to make the moral origin of language accessible.Finally, we indicate the importance and distinction of Levinasian approach to language as compared to approaches that do not take into account its other-regarding character.

Husserl, with respect to natural attitude, makes a crucial distinction between natural sciences and phenomenology, and this distinction provides an appropriate opportunity to enquire into the foundations of science from the phenomenological viewpoint. Here we consider mathematics and physics (as the ideal-type of natural science) from this viewpoint. We see that mathematics as the theory of manifolds, reconstructs the ideal world which is recognized as 'the scientific research field (especially in case of physics). Husserl's viewpoint in mathematics and natural sciences respectively tends to formalism and pragmatism.

The aim of this article is to make a picture of the general cultural-intellectual circumstances of the time in terms of the relation contemporary man finds between himself and the ‘truth’. One way to grasp this relation is obviously by putting the subject into its historical perspective. We begin the inquiry with the genealogy of the tradition of scribe and producing the text-as its achievement-in archaic and modern cultures. ‘Book’ has been taken to be the symbol of the source of the truth, and in movies, fairy tales, paintings, poems and literature, has always -been the sign of knowledge or truth itself. That is why the text is an appropriate departure point. We take it for granted the relationship man finds between text and the truth is subject to the very relation he finds between himself and the truth. Thus, studying the contemporary human's concept of the place of himself before the truth, we have no option but to deal with hermeneutics. Since this inquiry is not in line with only our linguistic interests, but with our philosophical question (vicinity or distance man feels between himself and the truth), we choose by nature philosophical hermeneutics among several hermeneutical approaches; in Heidegger's philosophical hermeneutics all consequences find ontological implications.The ultimate answer turns out to be that contemporary man considers he has have a very good chance of finding the truth directly and meeting it face to face immediately. It is important to note that this article attempts describe cultural conditions disinterestedly and make no issue of Heidegger's philosophy at all.

By coming up with his own philosophical hermeneutics, Gadamer seeks to show that for human beings, understanding is always rooted in tradition and prejudice. Enjoying a solid bond with the historicity of mankind, tradition makes understanding and knowledge conditional. Therefore, the authority of tradition prevents understanding from being realized in an absolute, objective way free of subjectivities and prejudices of the understanding subject. However, the question is if Gadamer’s devotes and room to freedom in the process of understanding as he accepts tradition. Does freedom provide us with an opportunity to free ourselves from the authority of tradition and our prejudices in understanding? Or the understanding an imposing process which always keeps us within the limits of tradition? This paper represents an effort to answer this question from Gadamer’s viewpoint.