JOURNAL OF ISLAMIC STUDIES
Year:2002 | Volume:- | Issue:56|Papers Count:11

In the twentieth century, the philosophy of science had many ups and downs. Karl Pauper, the renowned philosopher, was a staunch advocate of logical-prescriptive philosophy of science. The two pillars of his philosophy were realism and critical rationalism. Pauper did not believe in relativism, which to him was a kind of disease. He spoke of attaining the truth or verisimilitude. The philosopher of science after Pauper, specially Thomas Kuhn, Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend did not follow his ideals and turned instead to the historical-descriptive philosophy or science. This article is an attempt to introduce the Views of these three philosophers and to explain the relationship between them and Pauper and philosophy of science.

In this article, the writer explores the concept of the one God, Brahman, in the Upanishads, the holy book of the Hindus, from a monotheistic point of view. While in the Upanishads, God is often referred to in a way that may suggest belief in the multiplicity of gods, these various names are, in fact, various manifestations of the one God.  

One of the questions that Farabi, the great Muslim philosopher, has raised in his various works is the question of feyz, (grace), and fayazân(graciousness), but he has not dealt with it systematically and comprehensibly. In this article, the writer discusses the question from a critical analytic point of view and comments on the shortcomings of the account of Farabi, analyzing Ibn Sina's approach to the question.

In this article, the writer presents a critical analysis of Mula Sadra's view on the question of understanding and the relationship between known and knower. The writer begins with the explanation that our praise of the transcendental theosophy should not prevent us from criticizing it as a theory immune from all fault. Nor should it be give the impression that all parts of the theory are subject to criticism. The writer maintains that certain views of Mulla Sadra are not quite without ambiguity and faults. One of these is his view on the nature of understanding and the relationship between known and knower. The writer has made an attempt to first p resent Mulla Sadra's view on the Question lucidly, and in cases he has found no justification within Mulla Sadra's theosophy, he has criticized them as shortcomings and has explained the reasons for the shortcomings.

Philosophers of hermeneutics discuss the question of "understanding" with an emphasis on "the understanding of the text". The questions they discuss have great potential that can affect the way the new generation of intellectual Muslim thinkers think. Philosophical hermeneutics, founded by martin Heidegger, renowned German philosopher, and later developed by his student Gaddamer, has certain characteristics which make it useful in this regard. The present article explains certain results of Gaddamer's philosophical hermeneutics and its correspondence with the views of some Muslim intellectuals (with an  emphasis on Iranian intellectuals).  

In this article, the writer presents to the intellectual readers his reflections on the question of endless regress. The writer makes the following claims, which he tries to prove using argumentation: 1. There is no difference between transcendent theosophy and Peripateticist philosophy where the need to endless regress is concerned. 2. Comparison proof is wrong in the refutation of endless regress. 3. The refutation of endless regress has no need to conditions.