List of Articles
-
Open Access Article
1 - Editor's Note
Hossein Kalbasi Ashtariاز زمره مقاطع حساسّ و درخشان تاريخي كه از قضا بطور خاص با تاريخ فلسفه پيوند مستقيم دارد، قرن پنجم پيش از ميلاد با محوريّت و ميدانداري دو تمدّن اصلي ايران و يونان است. البته آگاهي ما از اين دوره شوربختانه يكسويه است و عمدتاً متكّي بر نوشته‌ها، منابع و گزارشهاي مورخان يون Moreاز زمره مقاطع حساسّ و درخشان تاريخي كه از قضا بطور خاص با تاريخ فلسفه پيوند مستقيم دارد، قرن پنجم پيش از ميلاد با محوريّت و ميدانداري دو تمدّن اصلي ايران و يونان است. البته آگاهي ما از اين دوره شوربختانه يكسويه است و عمدتاً متكّي بر نوشته‌ها، منابع و گزارشهاي مورخان يوناني است و از اين سو، يعني جهان ايراني و بطور خاص سرزمين پارس، هيچگونه مدركي در اختيار ما نيست و اگر هست، براي عرصه تاريخ‌نگاري و مستندسازي كارآيي چنداني ندارد. قرن پنجم را عصر طلايي و شكوفايي فرهنگ و تمدن يوناني ناميده‌اند و البته كه در اين تعبير و توصيف حقيقتي نهفته است: در آن دوره، بجز شماري از فيلسوفان، مجموعه‌يي از هنرمندان، شاعران، دانشمندان، نويسندگان و سياستمداران مهم و تأثيرگذار ظهور كردند كه آثار قلمي و معنوي آنان امروز نيز با گذشت بيش از 25 قرن، همچنان در مركز توجّه هر پژوهش علمي و تاريخي و فرهنگي است. هرچند از فيلسوفان آن دوره ـ موسوم به پيشاسقراطيان ـ بلحاظ آثار مكتوب، بغير از پاره نوشته‌ها، كتاب و دفتر و رساله منظّم و كاملي در اختيار نداريم، اما همين مقدار اندك و پراكنده هم براي تاريخ فلسفه و خود فلسفه، منبعي سرشار از تفكّر و تأمّلات عميق نظري است و دور نيست كه هر يك از آنان بعنوان آموزگار فلسفه براي ادوار بعدي خوانده شوند. دربارة نقش و سهم ساير دانشمندان و هنرمندان بسيار گفته‌اند و نوشته‌اند و امروزه در نوشته‌هاي مختصر و مفصّل نويسندگان غربي، بعنوان نياي پرافتخار فرهنگ، از آنان همچون پشتوانه درازدامن تاريخي ياد ميشود. نقد و ارزيابي آثار علمي و فرهنگي آن دوره با عنوان تمدن يوناني از جهات مختلفي قابل تأمل است كه به برخي از آن جهات در قالب ملاحظه مقدماتي اشاره ميشود: 1. در عنوان «سرزمين يونان» و «فرهنگ يوناني» قدري مسامحه و اغماض وجود دارد. چنانكه ميدانيم، سرزميني كه امروزه با نام كشور يونان شناخته ميشود، در قديم مشتمل بر مجموعه‌يي از جزاير و مناطق مستقل و نيمه‌مستقلاً بوده است كه عمدتاً در سواحل مديترانه و تركيه امروزي ـ آسياي صغير ـ بصورت كولونيها و مستعمره‌نشينها پراكنده شده و به‌اعتبار مهاجرت ساكنان يونان مركزي ـ آتيكا ـ به مناطق يوناني‌نشين آن دوره، شهرت يافتند. شايد عامل زباني نيز بيتأثير نبوده است، بطوريكه زبانهاي محلي جزاير و مناطق پراكنده آن عصر، پس از مدتي به زبان ـ و البته فرهنگ ـ عمومي يونان قديم خو گرفتند. گذشته از اين، نزاع و مناقشات سياسي و نظامي ميان آن مناطق، همواره در طول قرن پنجم بر قرار بوده است كه مشهورترين نمونه آن، نزاع و رقابت مستمر ميان آتن و اسپارت، بعنوان سمبل تقابل دو فرهنگ و نظام سياسي عصر باستان تلقي شده است. بدين ترتيب، چيزي بنام «دولت واحد» و حتي «وحدت سياسي» تحت عنوان «امپراتوري يونان»، عاري از واقعيت است و اين سرزمينهاي پراكنده، رقيب و حتي دشمن يكديگر، تنها در نقاطي خاص براي حفظ منافع و در مقابل دشمن مشترك به يكديگر نزديك ميشده‌اند و لذا اطلاق مفهومي واحد و يكدست بر اين قطعات متكثّر و عمدتاً ناسازگار، خالي از مسامحه نيست. 2. در مورد فيلسوفان و مكاتب و نحله‌هاي فلسفي نيز همين ملاحظه جاري است. بغير از كساني چون سقراط و افلاطون، اغلب يا تمامي چهره‌هاي شاخص فلسفي پيش و پس از سقراط، عمدتاً به خارج از قلمرو يونان مركزي تعلق داشتند و در آتن، بعنوان مهاجر و احياناً شهروند درجه دوم محسوب ميشدند. مشهود است كه ارسطو بعنوان بيگانه و مهاجر، براي تأسيس مدرسه خود به خارج از شهر آتن كوچ كرد و در طول فعاليت علمي خود، همواره تحت نظر حاكميت و رقباي خود قرار داشت. اين موضوع در مورد نويسندگان و دانشمندان و هنرمندان نيز صادق است و كمتر چهره‌يي در اين عرصه‌ها را ميشناسيم كه از سرزمين اصلي و مركزي يونان آن عصر، بر آمده باشد. نظير اين موقعيت در دنياي قديم را ميتوان شهر اسكندريه در شمال آفريقا نام بُرد. پس از افول و زوال قدرت سياسي و فرهنگي آتن، جمعيت زيادي از دانشمندان راه اسكندريه را در پيش گرفتند و در آنجا مدارس و حلقه‌هاي علمي، يكي پس از ديگري شكل گرفتند. چنانكه روشن است اطلاق عنواني مانند «تمدن اسكندريه» نيز خالي از اشكال نيست. بهر روي، فارغ از ملّيت و تعّلق افراد به آب و خاك و سرزمين مادري، سخن ما در تحليل و سنجش اصطلاح «تمدن يوناني» با تمركز بر قابلّيت و استعدادهاي ذاتي و جبلّي آنست كه در قياس با تمدنهاي ديگري، نظير هند، چين، مصر و ايران، نياز به بازخواني دارد. براي نمونه، موقعيت و شرايط امپراتوري پارس در همان عصر و برخورداري آن از وحدت سياسي و فرهنگي، دست‌كم در بازه زماني دويست سال حاكميت هخامنشيان، براي چنين مقصدي ميتواند مَدد رساند. ملاحظات ديگر در اين زمينه را به يادداشت بعدي واميگذاريم. Manuscript profile -
Open Access Article
2 - Philanthropia in Ancient Greece and its Relationship with Paideia
Majid Mollayousefi Maryam SamadiehThe present paper investigates the relationship between philanthropia and paideia based on the texts of classical Greece. The term “philanthropia” was first used in a play called Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus and was later used repeatedly in some of the literary and phi MoreThe present paper investigates the relationship between philanthropia and paideia based on the texts of classical Greece. The term “philanthropia” was first used in a play called Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus and was later used repeatedly in some of the literary and philosophical works of the Classical Greece. In this play, philanthropy has been attributed to Prometheus because he stole fire from Zeus to give it to human beings and save them from destruction. In the comedy Peace by Aristophanes, the god Hermes has been introduced as philanthropist because he makes it possible for the humankind to access peace. In Isocrates’ speech, the term philanthropist is applied to political leaders and people who posses the highest level of virtues and share such gifts as knowledge with others. Moreover, in the fourth book of Laws, Plato introduces Cronos a philanthropist because, during his reign, he tried to consolidate the pillars of culture and civilization in society. In the dialogue Euthyphro, Socrates considers himself to be a philanthropist because he shares his knowledge with others. As attested by Aristotle, philanthropia is an essential and intrinsic quality; however, it develops a knowledge-based form through paideia. On the other hand, those existents who are called philanthropists try to develop paideia and spread it in their society. Manuscript profile -
Open Access Article
3 - An Analytic Critique of the Reductionist Approach to Islamic Philosophy
Zahra Mazaheri Seyyed Mohammad Kazem AlaviOne of the recent debates regarding Islamic philosophy focuses on its originality and the questions of the “possibility of Islamic philosophy”. This identity-related problem has a significant effect on the history and future of Islamic philosophy. The view of the oppone MoreOne of the recent debates regarding Islamic philosophy focuses on its originality and the questions of the “possibility of Islamic philosophy”. This identity-related problem has a significant effect on the history and future of Islamic philosophy. The view of the opponents of the originality of this denomination, including Orientalists, Western historiographers, some Arab scholars, and those who are against any kind of religious philosophy can be considered to be reductionist. In their theories, they have reduced Islamic philosophy to a philosophy imitating Greek philosophy, Islamic Kalām and theology, and Arabic philosophy. Opposing Orientalists and historiographers view Greek philosophy as the base and Islamic philosophy as one of its branches. Some of the opponents believe that any attempt at establishing Islamic philosophy is in vain by insisting on the incompatibility of religion and philosophy. Moreover, by rejecting the possibility of religious philosophy, including Islamic philosophy, they maintain that the use of the word Islamic as an adjective for philosophy, as an intellectual science, is not justified and, thus, equate Islamic philosophy with Kalām and theology. Some other opponents, including Arabs, avoid the use of the phrase “Islamic philosophy”, and, by emphasizing the language of philosophical texts in Islamic tradition, call it Arabic philosophy. They limit Arabic philosophy to the Arab race and believe that this view is supported by history of philosophy. The present paper provides a critical analysis of the proponents of reductionist approaches to Islamic philosophy and aims to demonstrate and defend the necessity of its originality as a historical reality. Manuscript profile -
Open Access Article
4 - The Relationships Among Eros, Techne, and Philosophy in Plato’s Symposium and Phaedrus (With a Critical Emphasis on the Views of Vlastos and Nussbaum)
Javid Kazemi Seyyed Mohammad Hakak Ali Naqi Baqershahi Mohammad Raayat JahromiEros, the Greek god of love, in addition to its different meanings in the pre-Socratic mythological and philosophical history, has been used in Plato’s philosophy in different senses. This diversity has misled its interpreters in translating it into erroneous meanings s MoreEros, the Greek god of love, in addition to its different meanings in the pre-Socratic mythological and philosophical history, has been used in Plato’s philosophy in different senses. This diversity has misled its interpreters in translating it into erroneous meanings such as love. The present paper examines the meaning of eros in Plato’s two Dialogs of Symposium and Phaedrus and then explores its relationship with philosophy and techne. In the dialog of Symposium, after being used in some different meanings, Eros is used in the sense of the longing and desire for observing absolute beauty, which is the same philosophy. This is because in Plato’s philosophy, the difference between the Idea of the good (philosophy is a motive for viewing it) and the Idea of beauty is mentally-posited. In other words, the Ideas of the good and absolute beauty are the same truth that is viewed from two points of view. Now that dialectics – an activity in which multiple details are recognized from the one and the one from multiple details – is introduced in the dialog of Phaedrus as an instrument of techne, it can be concluded that the Platonic lover, and the philosopher cannot perceive the Idea of beauty (or the good) unless through techne. The major problems in this paper are discussed based on the views of two interpreters of Plato, Gregory Velastos and Martha Nussbaum. Manuscript profile -
Open Access Article
5 - The Role of Religious Beliefs of Khwajah Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī in his Association with and Dissociation from the Ismā‘īlīs
Seyyed Mohsen Hosseini Einullah Khademi Hoorieh Shojaee Baghini Mohammad Vahid SamimiA collection of factors underlay Khwajah Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī’s association with and dissociation from the Ismā‘īlī sect. This paper aims to disclose the role of his religious beliefs in his interactions with this religious sect. Ṭūsī’s education was completed in an atmosp MoreA collection of factors underlay Khwajah Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī’s association with and dissociation from the Ismā‘īlī sect. This paper aims to disclose the role of his religious beliefs in his interactions with this religious sect. Ṭūsī’s education was completed in an atmosphere of Twelver Shi‘ite philosophy, but in his youth he was also disenchanted with the existing imitative beliefs and dogmatic emphasis on extrinsic features of Sharī‘ah. This led him to develop an interest in some Ismā‘īlī teachings such as their attention to the esoteric meaning of religious texts and join this sect in response to their invitation. Of course, the undesirable conditions in the political-religious geography of the east of the Islamic world had also limited Ṭūsī’s choices. Nevertheless, based on some historical reports of the time of his relationship with the Ismā‘īlīs and some of his works that had been written in conformity with Ismā‘īlī ideas, it can be said that he had some ideological disagreements with them after joining the sect. His reaction after his separation from the Ismā‘īlīs, whom he has introduced as atheists and non-Muslims in his Kalāmī books, demonstrate his ideological conflicts with this sect. In fact, Ṭūsī joined the Ismā‘īlīs in his youth because of his religious ideas and, later, separated from them for the same reason. He revealed his ideological opposition to them in his Kalāmī written works. Manuscript profile -
Open Access Article
6 - Aeons in Christian Gnosticism (Based of Saint Irenaeus’ Reports)
Hojjatullah AskarizadehAeons are among fundamental concepts in Christian gnosticism. On the one hand, they are rooted in the myths of ancient Greek gods and, on the other hand, they originate in Platonic philosophy and school and are integrated with the elements of Christianity and the Holy B MoreAeons are among fundamental concepts in Christian gnosticism. On the one hand, they are rooted in the myths of ancient Greek gods and, on the other hand, they originate in Platonic philosophy and school and are integrated with the elements of Christianity and the Holy Book. Therefore, a conceptual and technical explanation of Aeons is important and plays a significant role in understanding the origins of early philosophical schools and ideas. Gnosticism and its founders, such as Valentinus, precede Plotinus, the founder of Neo-Platonism; hence, a clarification of gnostic concepts and, particularly, an analysis of the emanation of existents are of great importance in this school. Moreover, the etymology of dualism in gnosticism speaks of its original and fundamental relationship with Zoroastrian wisdom and the magi’s religion in ancient Iran. Therefore, a study of this point can reveal the integration of philosophical elements in ancient Iran and ancient Greece and the New and Old Testaments. Accordingly, this paper is intended to explain the concept of Aeons and the reasons of their emergence in Christian gnosticism based on Saint Erenaus’ reports and through investigating their roots in the technical philosophical terms in ancient Greece and the New and Old Testaments. Manuscript profile -
Open Access Article
7 - Development of the Concept of Free Will in the View of Modern Philosophers
Roohollah KarimiThe concept of free will is one of the fundamental concepts in Western metaphysical tradition. Although there are some important signs regarding the origination of this concept in Greek classical philosophy and Middle Age philosophy, it was just at the beginning of the MoreThe concept of free will is one of the fundamental concepts in Western metaphysical tradition. Although there are some important signs regarding the origination of this concept in Greek classical philosophy and Middle Age philosophy, it was just at the beginning of the modern period that the role of free will in the interpretation of the world was more highlighted in the thoughts of each philosopher more than those of the previous one. It seems as if the role of rational knowledge has become gradually less important in this process while the role of free will has become more significant. Inspired by Heidegger, the author has tried to strengthen his standpoint by yielding more proofs than he has offered in order to examine the development of the concept of free will. In doing so, he starts with Descartes and, by investigating the views of Espinoza, Leibniz, Rousseau, Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche, aims to analyze the quality of the development of this concept, particularly the relationship between the free will and knowledge in the modern period. The purpose is to show that the significance of free will for Schopenhauer and Nietzsche is not accidental, and the preliminary contexts of such a development had been previously and gradually paved by modern philosophers. The findings of this study indicate that, unlike the previous comments and interpretations, Nietzsche’s “will to power” is not a complement to a Schopenhaurian project but, rather, a complement to German idealism. Manuscript profile -
Open Access Article
8 - The Question of the Consistency of Intellectual Arguments and Intuition: Evolution of Fundamental Principles
Ghasem Pourhasan پورحسنFārābī and Ibn Sīnā’s philosophies are based on reason, and the further we go from these two philosophers, intuition and unveiling replace philosophical reasoning. The most important feature of the School of Isfahan is considered to be the synthesis of these two ration MoreFārābī and Ibn Sīnā’s philosophies are based on reason, and the further we go from these two philosophers, intuition and unveiling replace philosophical reasoning. The most important feature of the School of Isfahan is considered to be the synthesis of these two rational and gnostic approaches. This school of philosophy claims to have integrated philosophical and demonstrative aspects of affairs with religious teachings and, specifically, the Imāmīyah Qur’anic-narrative thoughts. All thinkers of the School of Isfahan have comprehensively explained and extended the Imāmīyah ḥadīth or commented on them based the Qur’anic intellectual wisdom. The secretive and allegorical approach to interpretation became prevalent in Ibn Sīnā’s time; however, writing commentaries on ḥadīths and traditional thoughts are among the unique characteristics of the philosophical school of Isfahan. This method has been in use since then, and some of the prominent post-Sadrian philosophers view writing interpretations and comments on Qur’anic verses as an inseparable part of philosophical tradition. Perhaps, the only exception here who has emphasized the distinction between these two fields is ‘Allāmeh Ṭabāṭabā’ī. Nevertheless, the fundamental question here is whether the School of Isfahan, with Mullā Ṣadrā’s philosophical system at its center, represents a philosophical and demonstrative school of thought or depends on religious thought and employs argumentation merely to access previously-established and correct thoughts. Mullā Ṣadrā and his followers have paid attention to this problem and emphasized the consistency of these two methods. The most important questions in this discussion include the following: 1) Is the method of rational argument completely different from the religious method? 2) If they are different, which depends on which? 3) Which is the basis in Mullā Ṣadrā’s philosophy: rational reasoning or defending Sharī‘ah and revealed thoughts? How could rational affairs, which can be verified or rejected, and Shar‘ī teachings, which cannot be rejected, be compatible with each other? Here, the author tries to show that Mullā Ṣadrā’s effort to establish this consistency has not been much successful. In fact, in doing so, he has had to either forget about rational reasoning or interpret the religion rationally to prove their consistency. Manuscript profile