Journal Of Religious Thought
Year:2018 | Volume:18 | Issue:1 (66) |Papers Count:7

Reading the text and its interpretation, especially in dealing with sacred religious texts, has led to the emergence of different approaches. These approaches in the Western tradition are the same hermeneutical approaches that, in a classical and modern category, are based on the possibility of discovering the intent of the gem and the original intention of the author and the owner of the text or its denial. Schleiermacher, as the founder of classical hermeneutics, finds that the discovery of the meaning of a gemstone and the original author's intention in a dialectical circle that occurs between the text and the subjective world of the owner of the text can be realized and realized on the basis of technical and psychological understanding that it can even provide A better understanding of the author himself. On the other hand, Seyyed Morteza, as the founder of rational interpretation in Shia, is based on his verbal foundations such as belief in monotheism, revelation, duty and divine grace, and based on rational goodness and reason, on the existence of a gem's meaning in the text and its discovery with The use of rational and literary methods is emphasized. Of course, despite the validity of the interpretation, it can not be emphasized that it is correct, except by explicitly expressing God in the most enlightening ways.

Each theory in humanism is influenced by its own methodological preconditions, including the epistemic preconditions and it is also born from them. After the advent of modernism, the two paralleled epistemic processes of rationalism and empiricism emerged in the philosophical thought of the West. The thought of Beccaria-the innovator of classical school of criminal law-has been affected by the both processes. The acceptance of the "utilitarianism", based on maximizing pleasure and minimizing suffering and the "association of meanings" have been the two significant signs of Breccia’s empiricism. On the contrary, advising and prescribing "utility" as well as resorting to "social contract", "natural law" and the "principle of justice" are indications of its impressionability from rationalism. Each of these cases has led to certain results in his criminal thought. Therefore, Beccaria’s criminal thoughts are epistemologically fluctuating between the two processes of empiricism and rationalism. Thus, it has not been subject to the epistemic unit structure. For example, if Beccaria, regarding the empiricism, values the "utilitarianism", the acceptance of the legislative system in him must also be based on that principle not on resorting to a "social contract" that is not empirically accepted. Also, accepting the "utilitarianism" is not compatible with the idea of "natural law" and "principle of justice".

Despite of the fact that Umre Khayyam is a peripatetic, he has defended the principality of quiddity. He deems that qualification of quiddity with existence is because quiddity is created. This idea raises the doubt of neglecting a part of history of philosophy by its authors. Semnani criticizing Mulla Sadra, Sabzevari and Aqa Ali Mudarres, deems Khayyam the initiator of debate of fundamental reality of quiddity or existence; reconsiders his vies from Sadra’s view point and confirms his proves. This paper arranging and explaining Khayyam’s view point (in accordance with Semnani’s expression), verifies Semnani’s judgement (according to Khayyam’s view point). This search is fundamental and its method is a mixture of description, analysis and comparison. The results are: 1-Shekhe Ishraq was under the impact of Khayyam. 2-against to Semnani’s view point, the ground of Khayyam’s claim is refusing of external occurrence of existence to quiddity, not opposing with fundamental reality of existence. And this is the basic distinction between point of view of Khayyam and that of Mirdamad and Mullasadra in this issue.

As the creator and generator of episteme, God in the root of Plantinga’s epistemology theory plays such a substantial role that overshadows the knower’s position. This approach will eventually mergesintonaturalistic episteme theories. According to Plantinga, awareness and duty should be removed from cognition process to solve Gotieh’s problem. The question is, however, whether byremoving them and the knower’s will, the theory solvesthe cognitive challenges as an extrovert reliabilism and virtue system or it just gives raise to another question. The present paper is an attempt to survey God’s position in proper function theory and answer the noted question. The study was conducted through library and theoretical review. The role of awareness in the elements of “proper function, ” “proper situation, ” and “desire”were elaborated through comparing awareness in Plantinga, Goldman, and Soza’s theories. The results showed that leaving God with the whole responsibility of the process of episteme development and removing the knower’s awareness from the structure of proper function of episteme forces, degrades human episteme to animal episteme. The outcome of adding the element of “desire” in the development of episteme is the conversion of episteme into something random and temperament in nature. Thereby and as to the element of “proper situation, ” Plantinga needs to add the knower to the process episteme development.

Contemporary scientific developments have gradually replaced the simplistic mechanical view of our world based on unchanging Newtonian laws with something more sophisticated, namely a belief in presence of a sort of irreducible indeterminism. If the belief in a deterministic world had once rendered the explanation necessary as to denial of God’s restriction in interacting with the creatures, then the issue would have been arisen on the other hand as the effort by religious philosophers and theologians has to be focused on expressing God’s agency and purposeful action in a world where causal necessity and relevance is apparently challenged by empirical sciences. Given the premise that scientific belief validates intrinsic indeterminism, the present paper aims at introducing and evaluating David Bartholomew’s approach as an indeterminist philosopher towards the topic, trying to defend the purposefulness of creation and rule of divine will over the creatures by denying the possibility of intrinsic chaos and showing the effect of nonmaterial causes.

Among humans, those contemplate in their ultimate goal & creation and find it out; are few and fewer are who definitely decided to attain of that goal after finding it; and travelled The Path to the end. Anyhow, anyone who leave step in the path of his transcendence & perfection, must know that don’t have a head a smooth way & easily obtained purpose. Except of many ups and downs of this way, there are contributed different aspects & elements in it. Since attaining of Traveler to mystical aim depends on considering all of these aspects, this article tries to name different aspects which are effective in the course of The Path and the traveler needs to be aware of them for realization of his aim. These factors are added up under three components: 1-Master & guide of The Path 2-Traveler’s knowledge duties 3-Traveler’s action duties. Furthermore, in the domain of action duties, different actions that traveler undertake, can be divided to some aspects: Worships & external rules of Shariah; duties about moral cultivation of the soul; the actions are necessary for self-mortification.