• Home
  • محمد  اکوان
    • List of Articles محمد  اکوان

      • Open Access Article

        1 - A Comparative Analysis and Explanation of the Creation of the World in the View of Ionian Philosophers
        Mohammad Akvan
        The creation of the world, which is an important and contradictory problem with an eventful historical background, has always attracted the attention of human beings and aroused their enthusiasm and curiosity since ancient periods. This problem has been investigated in Full Text
        The creation of the world, which is an important and contradictory problem with an eventful historical background, has always attracted the attention of human beings and aroused their enthusiasm and curiosity since ancient periods. This problem has been investigated in four epistemological areas: mythological cosmology, philosophical cosmology, monotheistic worldview, and scientific cosmology. Each of these disciplines has dealt with the creation of the world and its phenomena based on its own principles and methodology and introduced its particular bases of cosmological system. In this study, the process of the creation of the world and natural phenomena has been probed in the philosophical-cosmological view of Ionian philosophers, including Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes. In doing so, the author initially examines the principles of the quality of going beyond a mythological view towards a philosophical approach regarding the problem of creation through focusing on the historical trend of the development of theogonic view into a cosmogenic one, the quality of the change of personal explainers into non-personal ones, leaving mythological particularism behind and developing universal philosophical concepts, and then compares their methods and methodological approaches. Thales and Anaximenes have both explained the issue of creation based on the “change and evolution” of the prime matter of “water” and “air”, and Anaximander has done so based on the “separation” of objects from the first principle of apeiron. Thales and Anaximenes consider all existents and objects as the qualities of prime matter, while Anaximander grants an objective existence to qualities and deems them to be among real existents. Toward the end of this paper, the author tries to provide answers to the questions of how the structure and nature of the world and natural phenomena are formed in the view of Ionian philosophers, how existents and objects are created and annihilated, and whether there is a single origin and a prudent intellect called the Divine Element beyond all changes and evolutions, the turning of material elements into each other, and the detachment of objects. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        2 - Kierkegaard and the Origin of Existentialist Religious Theorems
        Fatemeh  Mohammad Mohammad Akvan
        The present paper explains the view of Kierkegaard, the prominent founding philosopher of existentialism, regarding religious teachings. Kierkegaard refers to three aesthetic, ethical, and religious spheres for human beings and maintains that there is a large distance b Full Text
        The present paper explains the view of Kierkegaard, the prominent founding philosopher of existentialism, regarding religious teachings. Kierkegaard refers to three aesthetic, ethical, and religious spheres for human beings and maintains that there is a large distance between the aesthetic and religious stages. Accordingly, in order to explain the process of development in these spheres, he uses such words as “pathos” and “leap of faith”. Kierkegaard’s discontinuous dialectics, when moving from one stage to the other, reveals that, firstly, these three-fold spheres can never unite with each other even if they co-exist for some time. Finally, there comes a time when, inevitably, one has to be chosen. Secondly, the quality of moving from one stage to the other is not logical and cannot be explained within a specific framework. When confronting the problem of religious faith, Kierkegaard does not allocate any place to the intellect and thought. In other words, he does not specify a certain time, place, and method so that individuals know when, where, and how they can reach the next stage. Rather, he believes that one must take risks in this process, do miracles, and follow the way without resorting to the intellect. Such risks cause a leap from the ethical sphere to the religious sphere, which is the highest level of an original life or existence; a leap which does not fit the framework of rational principles and, hence, cannot be perceived. Kierkegaard dedicates all his efforts in his works to demonstrating that the two spheres of religious belief and intellect are not only different but also in contrast to each other and, thus, one cannot evaluate religious concepts against the criterion of the intellect. Manuscript Document