Western epistemology, particularly representationalist epistemology, is the basic conviction behind Rorty's critical attacks. Rorty' s pragmatic approach aims to find explanations for political and ethical viwes of contemporary West. Such an approach is deeply rooted in teachings of linguistics, and descriptive approaches toward the formation of human’s understanding of entities. But in an atmosphere of theories, can Rorty be able to avoid meta-theoretical damages on the one hand, and normative views in the field of science, on the other hand.

Successors of contracting parties are persons who principally or by their representatives or not involved in concluding a contract, but contract's effects, with the whole or a part of parties patrimony, or the subject of the contract, will be transmitted to them, by the effects of contract. We mean the obligatory effects, i.e. rights and obligations. Usually, the successors are divided into two groups: general and particular. General successor is the one who is the substitute one of the parties by transmitting whole or a join part of parties patrimony. But particular successor is a one who has acquired the contractual rights and obligations of transferor will transmission of definite property. In this case, only those rights and obligations are acquired by the assignee which are connected to the property and are necessities and attachments of it.

Aristotle gives a definition of "universal" that Łukasiewicz considers non-comprehensive because it does not include null universals. In addition, Aristotle's definition of a particular can be understood in two ways: (1) a particular can only be predicated on one thing, (2) a particular cannot be predicated. This double conception, which is repeated with great frequency in the words of Aristotle's commentators, on the one hand, calls into question the opinion of Koons and Pickavance - who believe that a particular in Aristotle's view is unpredicable; And on the other hand, it is a conflict that must be resolved. In this essay, it will be shown that, firstly, Łukasiewicz's objection is not relevent and Aristotle's definition also includes null universals; And secondly, the conflict that seems to arise from the definition of particular can be resolved by distinguishing two types of predication, "in the manner of one name" and "not in the manner of one name".

One of the most perplexing issues in Arabic Logic is the particular quantifier for conditionals. Before discussing particular quantifier at cogent conditionals, Ibn-Sina deals with particular quantifier at categorical propositions and its divisions. But, as we shall see, his explanation at categorical propositions is inconsistent with his discussion at conditionals; and his analogy between the two realms is more confusing than explaining! Despite this, in this paper, I’ ll show that by using some branches in Modern Logic, such as second-order logic, modal logic and temporal logic, many of the ambiguities and the objections can be replied. Also, I’ ll glance at the reflection of the discussion in some of Ibn-Sina’ s great followers: Fakhr Al-Din Al-Razi, Afdal Al-Din Al-Khunaji, Athir Al-Din Al-Abhari, Khaje Nasir Al-Tusi, Shams Al-Din Al-Samaqandi and Qutb Al-Din Al-Razi. I shall show haw far they are from Ibn-Sina. Besides, it will be clear that their distinctions between contingent conditional and particular cogent conditional are very weak and, indeed, cannot help any way to understand the distinction.

In the Transcendent Philosophy, the basis of particular gradation is the return of the shared element to the distinguishing factor. This is a general rule and criterion for particular gradation, based on which at least three types of such gradation can be defined. In the first type, plurality dominates oneness so that all beings and plural things in the world merely share the aspect of being in existence. In the next type, oneness dominates plurality so that all the multiple beings of the world comprise the stages of a single being. The third type of particular gradation is midway between the other two types. Based on the particular gradation discussed by Aqa Ali Mudarres in the book of Bidayah al-hikam, oneness dominates plurality among possible multiple beings because all of them comprise the different grades of a single and absolute being. However, between the Almighty Necessary and the collection of possible multiple things, it is plurality which dominates oneness.

Motahhari innovates particular opinions on the Islamic philosophy. Studying them has a very effective role in understanding the development of Islamic Philosophy. Ponder over relationship between essential possibility and dispositional possibility and also analysis the aspects of quiddity are two indicated examples of his particular viewpoints on the Islamic philosophy.

Amphiboly is one of the most important and artistic literary figures of speech. Sadi is a poet who by using his unique linguistic creativity, creates amphiboly in his own particular method. In Sadi’s word, there are hidden beauties and delicacies in amphiboly which few parts it have been achieved by scholars so far. In this paper, firstly the amphiboly figure of speech and its kinds from the books of rhetoric scholars have been investigated. Then it has been tried to consider Sadi’s novelties in amphiboly. It was concluded that as well as using all known aspects of amphibology which he has used in his poem, Sadi has used other different kinds of amphibology not being used in others’ poems and are his own novelty which should (are suggested to) be added to the rhetorical books.

Let G be a non-abelian  nite group. In this paper, we prove that 􀀀 (G) is K4-free, if and only if G  = A  P, where A is an abelian group, P is a 2-group and G=Z(G)  = Z2  Z2. Also, we show that 􀀀 (G) is K1; 3-free if and only if G  = S3; D8 or Q8.