Ma`rifat Falsafi, Volume 14, Issue 3, No 55, Year 2025 , Pages 29-46

    Judgeablity of Existence

    Article Type: 
    Research
    Writers:
    Abbas Nikzad / Associate Professor in Department of Islamic Teaching University of Medical Sciences, Babol / Nikzad37@yahoo.com
    Abstract: 
    In the two articles entitled “Non-Judgeablity of Existence” (2010) and “The Obstacles to the Judgeablity of the essence of Existence” (2014), the author was seeking to prove that the essence of existence is non-judgeable. In other words, it is impossible to impose prescriptions and descriptions on the truth of existence. In the first article, the proofs are as follows: (a) neither presence nor absence of description; (b) neither the pure existence of description, nor the contradiction to it; (c) neither the absolute existence of description, nor being an instance of it; (d) the difference between the definitions of descriptions and the definition of absolute existence. Similarly, in the second article, the four obstacles have been referred to: (a) non-plurality of existence; (b) impossibility of accidents on the truth of existence; (c) impossibility of essentially obligatory accidents and essentially impossible accidents on the existence; and (d) limitlessness of truth of existence on the non-Judgeablity of existence. The present article is seeking to review the proofs of non-Judgeablity of existence as well as the obstacles of its Judgeablity. It seems that the spirit of both articles and the related arguments as well as obstacles are the same, and that discovering the main sophistries can falsify the validity of both articles. The present article is seeking to show the weak points of the arguments and obstacles in both articles in brief.
    چکیده و کلیدواژه فارسی (Persian)
    Title :حکم پذیرى وجود
    Abstract: 
    در دو مقاله «حکم ناپذیرى وجود» (1389)، و «موانع حکم پذیرى حقیقت هستى» (1393) نویسنده محترم، در پى اثبات این نکته است که حقیقت هستى، حکم ناپذیر است؛ یعنى محال است که بر حقیقت هستى، احکام و اوصافى بار شود.  در مقاله اول براهین بدین قرارند: 1. نه موجود و نه معدوم بودن وصف، 2. نه وجود ناب و نه نقیض وجود ناب بودن وصف، 3. نه حقیقت وجود مطلق و نه مصداق آن بودن وصف، 4. متفاوت بودن تعاریف اوصاف با تعریف وجود مطلق. همچنین در مقاله دوم، موانع چهارگانه 1. کثرت ناپذیرى وجود، 2. امتناع عروض بر حقیقت هستى، 3. امتناع عروض واجب بالذات و ممتنع بالذات بر هستى، 4. بى مرزى حقیقت هستى بر حکم ناپذیرى هستى اقامه شده است.  این مقاله درصدد نقد براهین حکم ناپذیرى وجود و نیز نقد موانع حکم پذیرى آن است. به نظر مى رسد روح هر دو مقاله و جان ادله و موانع یک چیز است و کشف مغالطات اصلى مى تواند اعتبار هر دو مقاله را مخدوش سازد. مقاله پیش رو به دنبال این است که با اختصار و ایجاز، نقاط ضعف هم براهین و هم موانع مطرح شده در دو مقاله را روشن سازد.  
    Cite this article: RIS Mendeley BibTeX APA MLA HARVARD VANCOUVER

    APA | MLA | HARVARD | VANCOUVER

    Nikzad, Abbas.(2025) Judgeablity of Existence. Ma`rifat Falsafi, 14(3), 29-46

    APA | MLA | HARVARD | VANCOUVER

    Abbas Nikzad."Judgeablity of Existence". Ma`rifat Falsafi, 14, 3, 2025, 29-46

    APA | MLA | HARVARD | VANCOUVER

    Nikzad, A.(2025) 'Judgeablity of Existence', Ma`rifat Falsafi, 14(3), pp. 29-46

    APA | MLA | HARVARD | VANCOUVER

    Nikzad, A. Judgeablity of Existence. Ma`rifat Falsafi, 2025; 14(3): 29-46