• List of Articles


      • Open Access Article

        1 - Editors Note
        Hossein  Kalbasi Ashtari
        پیشینة تألیف و تدوین کتاب یا مجموعه کتابهایی با عنوان «تاریخ فلسفه» چندان زیاد نیست و اساساً ظهور عناوینی چون تاریخ هنر، تاریخ ادبیات، تاریخ ادیان، تاریخ تمدن و مانند آن، به ظهور تفکر و نگاه تاریخی ـ که از مظاهر تفکر جدید و معاصر است‌ـ بازمیگردد. معنای این سخن آن نیست ک Full Text
        پیشینة تألیف و تدوین کتاب یا مجموعه کتابهایی با عنوان «تاریخ فلسفه» چندان زیاد نیست و اساساً ظهور عناوینی چون تاریخ هنر، تاریخ ادبیات، تاریخ ادیان، تاریخ تمدن و مانند آن، به ظهور تفکر و نگاه تاریخی ـ که از مظاهر تفکر جدید و معاصر است‌ـ بازمیگردد. معنای این سخن آن نیست که آدمی قبل از دورة جدید به مقولة تاریخ و تأملات تاریخی التفاتی نداشته است، بلکه مقصود آنست که در این عصر، نحوی از نگاه تاریخی تکوین، بسط و گسترش یافته که عالم و مسیر حوادث و سوانح را نه برابر طرح و مشیت‌الهی، که مطابق طرح فاعل شناسا و مدرک خودبنیاد و خودآيین (سوژه) تبیین و تقریر میکند. تاریخ در نظر قدما، صحنة ظهور اراده خالق هستی و واجد غایت و فرجامی ابدی است و نقش انسان همانا درک و دریافت غایت هستی و تطبیق ارادة فردی خویش با ارادة کلی و کیهانی است. این تفاوت و تمایز در همة شئون دانش و عمل، میان دورة اخیر و ماقبل آن بچشم میخورد. تاریخ‌انگاری و غلبة طرح و شاکلة سوژه، صفت عام و مشترک تمامی علوم انسانی و اجتماعی شمرده میشود. در این میان، از قرن نوزدهم میلادی به اینسو و از زمان درسگفتارهای هگل دربارة تاریخ فلسفه و فلسفه تاریخ و نیز نگارش پدیدارشناسی روح، مجموعه نوشته‌هایی با عنوان تاریخ فلسفه رواج قابل ملاحظه‌يی یافت و ابتدا در اروپای قاره‌يی و سپس در دنیای انگلیسی زبان، گسترش چشمگيري پیدا کرد. روح و منطق حاکم بر این نوشته‌ها موضوعی است که نیاز به تأمل و سنجش دارد، چرا که اولاً، گذشته از تفاوتها در صورت و قالب (حجم، ادبیات، نوع نگارش، ایجاز یا تفصیل، تعداد نویسندگان و...) در محتوا و مضامین (پیش‌فرضها و انگاره‌ها، منطق و هندسه، نوع تحلیل و تبیین، نوآوری یا تکرار و تقلید، منابع و مراجع و...)، در برخی مبادی و خاستگاه‌ها نیز از یکدیگر متمایزند و ثانیاً، در نگاه به میراث فلسفی، عرفانی و معرفتی مشرق زمین، غالباً و عملاً در مدار منطق و روش «شرق‌شناسی» و قالبهای کلیشه‌يی آن قرارگرفته و از انگاره‌های آن تبعیت میکند. این نسبت میان انحاء تاریخ‌نگاری غرب با شرق‌شناسی از یکسو و با فلسفة تاریخ از سوی دیگر، موضوعی است که در ردیف مبادی و مبانی دانش معاصر باید لحاظ شود. حکایت پیامدهای نگاه تاریخ‌انگارانه و شرق‌شناسانه به ساحتهای مختلف دانش، حکایت شورباری است، تا آنجا که مثلاً برخی نویسندگان عرب زبان که در چند دهة اخیر به نگارش تاریخ فلسفه روی آورده‌اند، یا مقید و مقهور پیش‌فرضهای شرق‌شناسی شده‌اند یا در دام ناسیونالیزم خام افتاده‌اند.گذشته از نقدهای گزنده ادوارد سعید و نشان دادن شجاعانه و بیپردة باطن شرق‌شناسی در نسبت با مقاصد سیاسی و استعماری، باید در نظر داشت که چهارصد سال پیشینة شرق‌شناسی کلاسیک، نوعی حالت متصلب و سترون در پیکرة آن پدید آورد و تاریخ‌انگاری (هیستوریسیسم) در این تصلب نقش نخست را ایفا کرد. کوتاه سخن آنکه، سنجش و ارزیابی این سلسله نوشته‌ها که بعضاً در محافل دانشگاهی نیز تدریس میشود، ضرورت دارد و به این مطلب، وفور و تعدد ترجمه‌هایی را باید افزود که در یکی دو دهة اخیر با عنوان تاریخ فلسفه در سطحی وسیع چاپ و منتشر شده است. بررسی آثاری که در زبان فارسی در عداد منابع تاریخ فلسفه قرار گرفته‌اند مجال مستقلی میطلبد، لیکن همینقدر اشاره کنیم که پس از نگارش سیر حکمت در اروپا به قلم محمدعلی فروغی در حدود هشتاد سال پیش و پس از انتشار مجلدات تاریخ فلسفه کسانی چون امیل بریه، ویل دورانت، برتراند راسل و سرانجام، فردریک کاپلستون، در خلال پنج دهة اخیر (و با لحاظ تمامی تفاوتهای کمی و کیفی میان آنها)، اکنون نیز مجموعه‌های تک جلدی و چند جلدی تاریخ فلسفه شامل تاریخ فلسفه‌های موسوم به راتلج، آکسفورد، استنفورد، گاتری، گمپرتس (دو اثر اخیر فقط در حوزة یونان باستان) و اخیراً آنتونی کنی، روانه بازار نشر شده‌اند و افزون بر این، برخی از این آثار حتی ترجمه مکرر شده است. این تنوع و تعدد، فی‌نفسه نشان از رغبت و توجه اهالی فلسفه به آگاهی از سیر و صیرورت تفکر فلسفی از گذشته دور تاکنون دارد ولی در عین حال بنظر میرسد برغم تعدد و گوناگونی این دسته از آثار، نوعی مشابهت و حتی اقتباس و تکرار ناشی از وحدت انگاره‌ها و پیش‌فرضها نیز در میان این آثار دیده میشود و در عوض، جای مطالعات انتقادی نسبت به مثلاً دورة یونانی و یونانی‌مآبی در آنها خالی است و طنین لحن ستایش‌گرانه و همدلانه نویسندگان قرن نوزدهم و بیستم میلادی در اینها نیز موج میزند. سخن خود را با طرح یک پرسش به پایان میبریم و آن اینکه، آیا نوبت به عرضة تصویری نو و متفاوت از تاریخ فلسفه و بویژه متفاوت با پیش‌فرضهای تاریخ‌انگارانه و شرق‌شناسانه نرسیده است؟ به دیدگاه‌ها و پیشنهادهای محققان و صاحب‌نظران کشور عزیزمان ارج گذارده و از گشوده شدن باب بحث و گفتگو در این زمینه استقبال میکنیم. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        2 - Dilthey’s Lifeworld, Mullā Ṣadrā’s Transcendent Philosophy, and the Possibility of Transcendent Human Sciences
        Ali Fathi
        The influential role of Dilthey is unparalled in theories in the field of human sciences. He contrasted methodological hermeneutics with the positivist method of natural sciences and stated that, as all natural sciences share a single method, hermeneutics functions as a Full Text
        The influential role of Dilthey is unparalled in theories in the field of human sciences. He contrasted methodological hermeneutics with the positivist method of natural sciences and stated that, as all natural sciences share a single method, hermeneutics functions as a method employed by all human sciences. Through distinguishing human and natural sciences from each other and in order to emphasize that each enjoys an independent identity and demonstrate that the concerns of the two fields are different from each other, Dilthey stipulated that human sciences deal with the world of life, lived experience, or the same lifeworld. The world of nature is a mechanical one, while the living world or life world is alive and dynamic and, thus, the method of treating it is different from that of natural sciences. Using a comparative method, in this paper the author has tried to use the concept of lifeworld in Dilthey’s philosophy as an incentive to explore Mullā Ṣadrā’s Transcendent Philosophy. Moreover, relying on some of his philosophical principles, such as the principiality of existence, gradation of existence, and the trans-substantial motion as well as his explanation of the concept of free will, developmental process of the soul, graded unity of the knower and the known, and the theory of t’awīl, the author has discussed the concept of “transcendent life” in Mullā Ṣadrā’s philosophy. Finally, he has tried to demonstrate how one could explain the necessary conditions for the possibility of “transcendent human sciences” in the light of the above-mentioned principles and concepts. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        3 - Foundations of Denying the Trans-Substantial Motion in the Philosophy of Ḥakīm Mullā Rajab‘alī Tabrīzī
        Zeinab Azad Moghaddam Abbas  Javareshkian Seied Morteza  Hoseini Shahrudi
        Mullā Rajab‘alī Tabrīzī was one of the philosophers of Isfahan School of Philosophy and a contemporary of Mullā Ṣadrā. His thoughts, originated in a school which was almost in contrast to Sadrian philosophy, clearly show the strengths and weak points of Islamic philosop Full Text
        Mullā Rajab‘alī Tabrīzī was one of the philosophers of Isfahan School of Philosophy and a contemporary of Mullā Ṣadrā. His thoughts, originated in a school which was almost in contrast to Sadrian philosophy, clearly show the strengths and weak points of Islamic philosophy. The purpose of the present study was to examine the roots of Mullā Rajab‘alī Tabrīzī’s thoughts regarding the trans-substantial motion. Since he believed in the principiality of quiddity as opposed to the principiality of existence, he considered motion to be disconnected and of the type of generation and corruption and maintained that gradual and trans-substantial motion was impossible. In addition to the lack of a subsistent subject and the mortality of the species in the trans-substantial motion, the belief in certain philosophical principles has resulted in the rejection of the trans-substantial motion as a philosophical principle by some philosophers such as Mullā Rajab‘alī Tabrīzī. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        4 - A Critical-Historical Review of Abharī’s Analysis of the Elements and Typology of Denotation Based on the Distinction of two Models: Free Will-Speaker and Meaning-Interlocutor
        Hashem  Ghorbani Abbas Bakhshandeh Bali
        The present study provides a critical-historical review of semiotics in Abharī’s view and aims to explain his encounter with the problems of the realm of semantics and his standpoints in this regard. Here, the authors have tried to evaluate and analyze some descriptions Full Text
        The present study provides a critical-historical review of semiotics in Abharī’s view and aims to explain his encounter with the problems of the realm of semantics and his standpoints in this regard. Here, the authors have tried to evaluate and analyze some descriptions of denotation and its typology. Accordingly, relying on Abharī’s conception of the nature of denotation, his analysis of its typology, and an evaluation of his view as to the inefficiency of denotation of implication, the authors provide a critical account of this philosopher’s view while employing certain elements, such as the speaker’s will in transferring meaning, the role of interlocutor’s understanding in the correct construction of meaning, and thought structure. Logicians believe that denotation depends on context and have considered contextual awareness as a necessary condition. The authors have also explained that, in addition to this criterion, some other elements in the realm of meaning, the speaker, and the interlocutor affect the creation of denotation. Through moving the concept of denotation beyond the domain of single words and its vast application to sentences and, particularly, propositions and also following a non-quiddative approach in dealing with the specification of the concepts of the field of denotation, Abharī connects semiotics with semantic discussions. Here, Abharī’s views regarding semiotics have been presented in comparison to other thinkers. Some of his endeavors in this realm include redefining denotation based on the meaning-interlocutor model, providing two different interpretations of the place of context in the typology of denotation, criticizing Fakhr al-Dīn’s analysis of similar denotations and their distinction from the other two types of denotation through adopting a dependent or independent subject and considering evaluation-centeredness, criticizing the analysis of Khunaji and Kashi of the metaphorical nature of inclusion and implication denotation, criticizing Suhrawardī’s and Rāzī’s description of implicative-corresponding relations, and criticizing the inefficient approaches to implication denotation, and designing an image based on misunderstanding based on the plurality of mental transfers. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        5 - Typology of Deism in the 17th and 18th Centuries Based on Samuel Clarke’s Classification
        Mohamad  Mohamadinia Mohamad Ali  Abdollahi Hossein  Saberi
        Deism refers to a philosophical and theological view of God, Man, and religion. The present paper aims to provide a conceptual analysis of Deism in the 17th and 18th centuries through exploring its etymology and following an analytic-descriptive method. Moreover, it is Full Text
        Deism refers to a philosophical and theological view of God, Man, and religion. The present paper aims to provide a conceptual analysis of Deism in the 17th and 18th centuries through exploring its etymology and following an analytic-descriptive method. Moreover, it is intended to present a general classification of Deism based on Clarke’s classification. An encyclopedic definition of deism suffers from ambiguity, and a reference to etymological dictionaries reveals that the etymological subtleties of this term have not been taken into consideration in the conversion of dues into deism. However, through Clarke’s classification, one can develop a better grasp of the distinction of the deism of his time from theism and its different types. Clarke’s four-fold classification, as the first comprehensive report of deism, claims that the proximity and similarity of deism to Christianity, from the first type to the fourth type, proceeds stepwise from a minimum to a maximum. Deists of the first type reject divine providence but believe in unity, creation, and God’s knowledge. The second group of deists, while believing in the deistic propositions of this type, consider physical laws to be ruled by divine providence but reject its rule over ethical laws. The third group believe that God’s providence is related to His moral perfections, and He governs the world relying on His moral attributes including justice, benevolence, and honesty. Finally, deists of the fourth type, in addition to the above doctrines, believe in the immortality of the soul and otherworldly reward and punishment. According to Clarke, all types of modern deism deny the Christian revelation, and one of the main differences from revealed religions is conceptology and believing in divine revelation. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        6 - A Study of Multiplicity of the Category of Substance in Khwājah Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī
        Mahdi Dasht Bozorgi Mohammad Ismail Abdollahi Mohammad Karaminia
        Khwājah Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī has sometimes provided two different views regarding a scientific problem, one following the method of the people of kalam and the other following the method of philosophers. At first sight, one might assume that Ṭūsī is making contradictory co Full Text
        Khwājah Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī has sometimes provided two different views regarding a scientific problem, one following the method of the people of kalam and the other following the method of philosophers. At first sight, one might assume that Ṭūsī is making contradictory comments; however, an analysis of his discussions reveal that such contradictions are only superficial and can be explained justifiably within the framework of his general system of philosophy. One of such contradictory cases pertains to the category of substance. In his works on logic, similar to Peripatetic philosophers, Ṭūsī considers substance to be a category or genus of genera; however, he deemed of substance as a secondary intelligible in his Tajrīd al-i‘tiqād. The present paper aims to clarify this view of the multiplicity of the category of substance. Then, in order to judge its legitimacy, the authors pose some possibilities and finally introduce one of the views which seems to be compatible with reality as their own standpoint. Through referring to Ṭūsī’s words and considering his social and academic position during his time, when philosophers were under huge attacks by mutikallimun, as well as given his moderate, truth-loving, and academic character, the authors demonstrate that this contradiction is superficial rather than real. Following the library method, this research was conducted based on a thorough study of Ṭūsī’s works. Nevertheless, the researchers also took the views of his commentators into consideration when necessary. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        7 - A Glance at A Century of the Translation of Philosophical Texts in Iran (Bibliography of Western Philosopher from Before Christ until the 20th Century)
        Saeed Anvari Maryam Mahdavi Mazdeh
        During the last century, we have witnessed the second movement of the translation of Western philosophical works in Iran. This bibliography provides a list of the works of 40 famous philosophers of the West from before Christ until the 19th century which have been trans Full Text
        During the last century, we have witnessed the second movement of the translation of Western philosophical works in Iran. This bibliography provides a list of the works of 40 famous philosophers of the West from before Christ until the 19th century which have been translated into Persian. The translators who have rendered classic works of philosophy into Persian have sometimes focused on a specific philosopher and have specialized in the translation of his works. For example, Manouchehr Bozorgmehr has mainly been interested in George Berkeley, Mohammad Hassan Lotfi in Plato and Plotinus, Daryush Ashuri in Friedrich Nietzsche, Ziba Jebelli in Marx, and Manuchehr Sanei in Kant. The works of some philosophers have also been translated several times; for example, the book of Thus spoke Zarathustra: A Book for all and None holds the record with 14 different translations. In certain cases, none of the books of some famous Western philosophers, such as Nicolas Malebranche, Dans Scotus, Bonaventure, and William of Ockham, has been translated into Persian. In this bibliography, the authors have introduced the works of the following philosophers: Thomas Aquinas, Augustino of Hippo, Anselm of Canterbury, Epictetus, Epicure, Aristotle, Herbert Spencer, Baruch Spinoza, Plato, Plotinus, Friedrich Engles, Marcus Aurelius, George Berkeley, Francis Bacon, Blaise Pascal, Pre-Socratic Philosophers, Descartes, Jean Jacque Rousseau, Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Friedrich Schleiermacher, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich von Schiller, Ludwig Feuerbach, Johan Gottlieb Fichte, Kant, Auguste Comte, Soren Kierkegaard, John Locke, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Lucretius, Marx Niccolo Machiavelli, Montesquieu, George Edward Moore, John Stuart Mill, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, Thomas Hobbes, George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, and David Hume. Manuscript Document