theory

List of Articles theory

Open Access Article
- Abstract Page
- Full-Text
1 - Resolving Zeno’s Paradoxes Based on the Theory of the “Linear Analytic Summation” and Evaluation of Evolution of Responsesa
Reza Shakeri Ali Abedi Shahroodi
20.1001.1.20089589.1401.12.4.5.1

Zeno challenged the problem of motion following his master Parmenides and presented his criticisms of the theory of motion based on four arguments that in fact introduced the paradoxes of this theory. These paradoxes, which contradict an evident problem (motion), provok More

Zeno challenged the problem of motion following his master Parmenides and presented his criticisms of the theory of motion based on four arguments that in fact introduced the paradoxes of this theory. These paradoxes, which contradict an evident problem (motion), provoked some reactions. This paper initially refers to two of Zeno’s paradoxes and then presents the responses provided by some thinkers of different periods. In his response to Zeno’s paradoxes, Aristotle separated the actual and potential runs of motion and, following a mathematical approach, resorted to the concept of infinitely small sizes. Kant has also referred to this problem in his antinomies. Secondly, the authors explain the theory of linear analytic summation, which consists of two elements: 1) The distance between two points of transfer can be divided infinitely; however, the absolute value of the subsequent distance is always smaller than the absolute value of the previous distance; 2) since the infinitude of the division is of an analytic rather than a synthetic nature, the summation limit of these distances will be equal to the initial distance. Based on this theory, as motion is not free of direction and continuous limits, an integral limit of distance is traversed at each moment, and the analytic, successive, and infinite limits of distance are determined. The final section of this paper is intended to evaluate the responses given to the paradoxes. Manuscript profile
Open Access Article
- Abstract Page
- Full-Text
2 - The Relationship Between Finitude and Pure Theory in Heidegger’s Reading of Aristotle
Mehrdad Ahmadi Mohamadreza Asadi
20.1001.1.20089589.1401.13.3.3.0

In Aristotle’s view, theoretical activity is an emotion-free and worldless activity that leaves all negative and resisting affairs behind. As a result, because of the falsity of finitude, error has no way into theoretical activity. Accordingly, theory enjoys a specific More

In Aristotle’s view, theoretical activity is an emotion-free and worldless activity that leaves all negative and resisting affairs behind. As a result, because of the falsity of finitude, error has no way into theoretical activity. Accordingly, theory enjoys a specific kind of autonomy, in other words, an individual involved in pure theorizing perceives that in the course of theoretical activity he is immune to not only any emotion but also to any error in his purely theoretical activities. However, the essential point here is that in Heidegger’s view, Aristotle could never provide such a status for Man at the level of theory without undergoing a change in his understanding of existence and moving to the realm of poiesis. According to Heidegger, the horizon of ousiology of existence is the result of a transformation in the Greeks’ understanding of existence. As a result, the structural finitude of the emergence of existence and the finite position of the theoretician among existents enable him the develop an absolute knowledge of at least one existent, that is, theos or existing God. Therefore, the present paper aims to demonstrate how, based on Aristotle’s ousiology, knowledge in the sense of theorizing has turned into a deserving desire for all human beings and has emerged as a possibility for transcending the essential finitude of theory. Manuscript profile
Open Access Article
- Abstract Page
- Full-Text
3 - Historical Background of the Theory of Immutability of Change in the Problem of the Relation of the Changing to the Immutable
Mahdi Assadi
20.1001.1.20089589.1401.13.2.5.0

In Sadrian philosophy the change in motion is the same as its immutability, which justifies the relationship between the changing to the immutable. The question here is whether the theory of immutability of change had any supporters before Mullā Ṣadrā. The main purpose More

In Sadrian philosophy the change in motion is the same as its immutability, which justifies the relationship between the changing to the immutable. The question here is whether the theory of immutability of change had any supporters before Mullā Ṣadrā. The main purpose of this study is to provide an appropriate response to this question. This theory has been criticized by Muslim thinkers and philosophers for a very long time. Therefore, this paper provides a discussion of the most important of such criticisms based on available evidence. Some scholars have attributed the theory of immutability of change to early philosophers in order to solve the problem of the relation of the changing to the immutable and support their own views, which does not seem to be based on solid evidence. Prior to Mullā Ṣadrā, some philosophers maintained that the heavenly sphere enjoys continuity and fixity in its evolution; however, this cannot be considered as a final resolution to the problem of the relation of the changing to the fixed. Here, the author concludes that the fixity of Sadrian change should be criticized because it leads to accepting a view attributed to Rajol Hamedani about the “universal”. Manuscript profile

Current Issue

Published Issues

Menu

Browse

List of Articles theory