معرفت فلسفی

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall 2011), pp. 179-190

Questioning “Mullā Sadra’s Theory of the Gradation of Existence under Debate”

Abbas Nikzād 1

It is one of Mulla Sadra’s masterpieces to establish the gradation of existence. Some consider “principality of existence” and “gradational levels of existence” as two major wings of Mulla Sadra’s Transcendental Philosophy (Hikmat Muta’aliyah). This means that any critique of each one of these two principles leads to depriving it of one of its wings, and this shows the import of the issue of gradation for his philosophy.

The author in this article wants to criticize an article entitled “Mulla Sadra’s Theory of the Gradation of Existence under Debate,” published in Ma’rifat-e Falsafi 29, to defend Mulla Sarda’s theory of the gradation of existence and to answer the questions and comments by the author of that article.

Keywords: Gradation of Existence, The Essence of Existence, What Causes the Difference, What is Shared in Common, Particular Gradation, Hikmat Muta’aliyah, Mulla Sadra.

 

 

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall 2011), pp. 133-162

All-Pervading Existence as “the Real Genius” in the Philosophy of Mulla Sadra

Muhammad Sa’idi Mehr 2

Morteza Karbala’i-lū 3

Reza Akbarian 4

All notions pertaining to quiddity are prone to re-interpretation after one accepts the idea of the principality of existence, because one has to interpret them on the bases on the attributes of existence.

The authors in this article try to infer Mulla Sadra’s idea about “genius” based on his unique idea and ontological interpretation of “differentia”. They want to know that, according to him, with an intuitive knowledge of which level of existence one becomes capable of contemplating about genius. In fact, they want to apply the same approach Mulla Sadra has taken with regard to the real differentia to the problem of genius. Since he considers differentia as reflecting “individual being”, the authors take the real genius as reflecting the all-pervading existence. They also refer to the incompatibility of this idea with Ibn-Sina’s well-known idea of the abstraction of genius from matter.

Keywords: Existence, Quiddity, Differentia, Genius, All-pervading Existence, Matter.

 

 

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall 2011), pp. 133-162

A Critique of Physicalism on the Basis of its Division into A priori and A posteriori

Mahdi Ghiāsvand 5

Both a priori and a posteriori physicalists agree with each other in holding that physicalism, as a metaphysical approach to the world, is an appropriate approach that includes the nature of mind. However, they disagree on whether certain truths are knowable a priori. Of course, both of them_ a priori physicalists and a posteriori physicalists_ maintain that the doctrine “physicalism” can only be known a posteriori. Despite such a consensus, there is no consent about how exactly the doctrine should be formulated.

The author has a critique of physicalism on the basis of this dispute and its division into a priori and a posteriori. It seems that physicalism requires a priori knowledge, but on the other hand, it seems also that it is impossible. It seems that there are some a priori entailments (implications) from microphysical truths to ordinary macroscopic truths. But it will be argued that there are no a priori entailments (implications) from microphysical truths to phenomenal truths because these truths cannot be functionalized. The purpose of this article is to argue that since such entailments (implications) are necessary for physicalism to be true, physicalism would be false regarding the phenomenal consciousness.

Keywords: A priori Physicalism, A posteriori Physicalism, Phenomenal Consciousness, Semantic Implication, Epistemic Implication.

 

 

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall 2011), pp. 105-132

A Comparative Review on the Meaning of Barzakh and Mithāl in the works of Muslim Philosophers, Gnostics, and Theologians

Ehsān Torkāshwand 6

Akbar Mirsepāh 7

The term, “Barzakh” (inter-world) has different literal and technical meanings, and confusing them leads to misunderstanding. This preoccupation was the motive behind this article to sift through to works of philosophers, gnostics, and theologians in order to clarify the exact meanings they invest this term with.

The authors conclude that Muslim philosophers use the term “barzakh” to refer to a world between the material and the intellectual worlds, and they divide it into distinct and indistinct ones. Gnostics, on the other hand, divide it into ascending and descending ones. They together form parts of the philosophers’ distinct mithāl. For theologians, however, barzakh represents the intermediary gap between one’s death and the one’s resurrection in the hereafter. It differs, conceptually, from that of philosophers and Gnostics, but it refers to the ascending curve of barzakh in Gnostics.

Keywords: Barzakh, Mithal, Matter, World, Philosophy, Gnosticism, Theology, Distinct, Indistinct, Ascending, Descending.

 

 

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall 2011), pp. 73-104

The Question of the Temporal Origination/Eternity of the World in the History of Philosophy

Muhammad Hosain Fāryāb 8

Rezā Berenjkār 9

Temporal origination or eternity of the world, in the sense of having or not having a temporal beginning, has been debated among Muslim and non-Muslim thinkers since antiquity. This article has a review of this issue in the history of philosophy, and concludes that its origins go back to ancient Greece. Some of Greek philosophers’ arguments, especially that of Proclus, had a great impact on the popularity of the theory of temporal eternity of the world. Although the followers of peripatetic philosophy along with those of the Ishraq school have often preferred the theory of eternity of the world, there emerged a new vision in Hikmat Muta‘āliyah, which gave priority to the theory of temporal origination of the world.

Keywords: Temporal Origination of the World, Temporal Eternity of the World, Philosophy, Peripatetic, Ishraqi, Hikmat Muta’aliyah.

 

 

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall 2011), pp. 39 -72

Validity Test for KR Relevance Logic

Asadollāh Fallāhi 10

The most important type of conditionals, in Ibn Sina’s logic, is “concomitant hypothetical propositions”. The nearest conditional element of the modern logic to this type of conditionals is “relevant concomitance”. That part of modern logic that deals with such concomitance is called, “relevance logic”. There is a debate among relevance logicians on whether accepting a contradiction implies any arbitrary proposition. In other words, is a contradictory proposition related to any arbitrary proposition? A positive answer leads to a logic called “KR”, which benefits from a simpler and more intuitive semantic, compared to other relevance logics which reject concluding arbitrary propositions from contradiction.

Determining the validity of arguments in various systems and semantics of relevance logic is a difficult task, which is rarely dealt with in the literature of relevance logic. Inspired by Hughes’ and Cresswell’s valuation method in modal logic, called “relevance testing”, the author in this article suggests a relevance testing for KR logic, and shows its use through some examples.

Keywords: Relevance Testing, Relevance Logic, KR Logic, R Logic, Concomitant Hypothetical Propositions, Relevant Concomitance.

 

 

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Fall 2011), pp. 11 -38

Evaluating the Idea of Non-argumatiativeness of Primary Premises and its Consequences in Ayatollah Javadi Amoli’s Viewpoint

Mohammad Hoseinzādeh 11

Gholām-Rezā Fayyāzi 12

Primary premises, as one of the most important parts of a demonstration, play an essential role in the epistemological system of foundationalism. Some philosophers, including Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, believe it impossible to prove primary premises through a demonstration. Before him, Fakhr Rāzi and Mullā Sadrā had suggested the same idea, and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli has put the last touches on it, and has answered its critiques. Therefore, the present article briefly evaluates the arguments suggested by Razi and Mulla Sadra, and then appraises, in more detail, that of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli. Finally, the authors conclude that there is no reason for considering the principle of the impossibility of coexistence and negation of two contradictories as the first of the first things.

Keywords: First Premise, Self-evident, Deductive Syllogism, Complementary Syllogism, Middle Term, Mother of all Propositions, Determination, Certainty, Impossibility of Contradiction, Javadi Amoli, Mulla Sadra, Fakhr Razi.

---

1 Assistant Professor, University of Medical Sciences, Babol: nikzad37@yahoo.com

Received: 2011/4/30 Accepted: 2011/9/11

2 Associate Professor, Tarbiat Modarres University: saeedimehr@yahoo.com

3 Ph.D. Student of Philosophy, Tarbiat Modarres University: morteza.karbalaee@gmail.com

Received: 2011/6/8 Accepted: 2011/10/21

4 Associate Professor, Tarbiat Modarres University: dr.r.akbarian@gmail.com

5 Ph.D Student of Philosophy, Tehran University: mahdi.ghiasvand@gmail.com

Received: 2011/4/30 Accepted: 2011/10/11

6 Ph.D Student of Islamic Theoretical Foundations, Imam Khomeini I.E.R.: Torkashvand110@yahoo.com 

Received: 2011/6/9Accepted: 2011/8/20

7 Assistant Professor, Imam Khomeini I.E.R.: mirsepah@qabas.net

8 PhD Student of Islamic Theology, Imam Khomeini I.E.R.: m.faryab@gmail.com

9 Assistant Professor, Tehran University in Qum; Received: 2011/6/12 Accepted: 2011/9/20

10 Assistant Professor, Iranian Hikmat and Philosophy Research Institute: falahiy@yahoo.com

Received: 2011/4/18Accepted: 2011/10/6

11 M.A Student of Fiqh and Usul, Qum Seminary: mhosseinzadeh110@gmail.com

12 Professor of Philosophy, Imam Khomeini I.E.R. Received: 2011/5/6 Accepted: 2011/9/2

---

Table of Contents

Editor’s Foreword

Evaluating the Idea of Non-argumatiativeness of Primary Premises and its Consequences in Ayatollah Javadi Amoli’s Viewpoint

Mohammad Hoseinzādeh and Gholām-Rezā Fayyāzi

Validity Test for KR Relevance Logic

Asadollāh Fallāhi

The Question of the Temporal Origination/Eternity of the World in the History of Philosophy

Muhammad Hosain Fāryāb and Rezā Berenjkār

A Comparative Review on the Meaning of Barzakh and Mithāl in the works of Muslim Philosophers, Gnostics, and Theologians

Ehsān Torkāshwand and Akbar Mirsepāh

A Critique of Physicalism on the Basis of its Division into A priori and A posteriori

Mahdi Ghiāsvand

All-Pervading Existence as “the Real Genius” in the Philosophy of Mulla Sadra

Muhammad Sa’idi Mehr , Morteza Karbala’i-lū, and Rizā Akbariān

Questioning “Mullā Sadra’s Theory of the Gradation of Existence under Debate”

Abbas Nikzād

Arabic Abstracts

English Abstracts

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi is a quarterly journal of philosophical inquiry, dedicated to research in philosophy. This journal covers issues concerning the comparison, critique, and analysis of the foundations and ideas of Muslim philosophers, as well as the juxtaposition, scrutiny, and evaluation of theories articulated by Muslim and non-Muslim philosophers. Academically exploring novel and unprecedented issues in comparative philosophy is among the aims of this journal.

Valuing your philosophical thoughts and reflections, we cherish your criticisms and comments in order to improve the journal in all aspects. Please send your manuscripts to the editor, and your notes and suggestions to the coordinator.

Articles published herein, reflect only the viewpoints of their respected authors.

Citing material from this journal is allowed, Provided that its Source is mentioned.

Subscriptions: Individual issues are 6000 Rls., and yearly subscription is 24000 Rls. Payable to the banking account # 0105075269000, Melli Bank, Imam Khomeini Institute Branch (Code 2723). Please send a copy of your receipt along with the subscription information.

In the name of Allah

Ma‘rifat-i Falsafi Vol. 9, No. 1

A Quarterly Journal of Philosophical Inquiry Fall 2011

A publication by Imām Khomeini Institute for Education and Research

Editor in Chief: Ali Mesbah

Editor: Rizā Akbariān

Deputy Editor: Mahmūd Fath’ali

Coordinator: Rūhollāh Farīsābādi

Editorial Board:

Dr. Ahmad Ahmadi: Professor, Tehran University

Dr. Rizā Akbarīyān: Associate professor, Tarbīyat Mudarris University

Dr. Ghulām-Rizā A‘wāni: Professor, Shahid Beheshti University

Dr. Muhammad Fanā'i: Associate Professor, Imām Khomeini Inst. for Education and Research

Hoj. Ghulām-Rizā Fayyāzi: Professor, Imām Khomeini Inst. for Education and Research

Dr. Hussain Ghaffāri: Associate Professor, Tehran University

Hoj. Muhammad husainzādeh: Associate Prof., Imām Khomeini Inst. for Education and Research

Dr. Muhsin Javādi: Associate Professor, Qum University

Dr. Muhammad Legenhausen: Associate Professor, Imām Khomeini Inst. for Education and Research

Dr. Muhammad Sa‘īdi Mehr: Assistant Professor, Tarbīyat Mudarres University

You may access this journal on the web at www.ricest.ac.ir and www.sid.ir

Address: Ma’rifat-e Falsafi PO Box: 37165—186

4^th Level, Imam Khomeini Institute, Tel: Editorial: (251)2936008 & 2113468

Johuri Islami Blvd., Subscribers: (251)2113474

Amin Blvd., Qum, Iran Fax: (251)2934483

Internet: www.nashriyat.ir  E-mail: marifat@qabas.net