• OpenAccess
    • List of Articles Plato

      • Open Access Article

        1 - Nature in the Views of Greek and Muslim Philosophers
        داود محمدیانی
        Undoubtedly, nature has always attracted the attention of scientists and philosophers as the loci of the genesis and growth of natural existents and its current. Scientists working in the field of empirical sciences mainly seek the knowledge of natural existents and law More
        Undoubtedly, nature has always attracted the attention of scientists and philosophers as the loci of the genesis and growth of natural existents and its current. Scientists working in the field of empirical sciences mainly seek the knowledge of natural existents and laws of nature, while philosophers basically deal with the knowledge of nature itself and its structure and try to provide an answer to the questions of what the meaning of nature is, what its structure is, what relationship exists between existents and nature, whether nature is the primary source of the appearance of existents in the world, and whether nature, as matter and form, is a cradle for the appearance of various forms of existents. Greek philosophers and, later, Muslim philosophers have provided various responses to these questions. In ancient Greek philosophy, physis or nature means growth, living, and life. This meaning, which had provided the basis for pre-Socratic philosophy, changed into the “content of the world” and “maker of things” in Stoic philosophy. Plato also defined physis as the origin of the appearance of all things. He used the words technē (art) and archē (origin) to explain the emergence of the world and considered the creation of the world as an artistic innovation. Aristotle, who viewed the world synonymous with the whole nature, believed that nature is the source of motion and change in things; however, Muslim thinkers have provided various ideas about nature. Ikhwān al-Ṣafā maintained that nature is the fifth level of the levels of being and the “active” aspect of the world, with matter as its passive aspect. Ibn Sīnā considered nature and the interactions therein as God’s act and believed that nature is the cause of the appearance of corporeal substance by synthesizing matter and form. Unlike the Peripatetics, who believed that archetypes are the same as the nature of things, Suhrawardī rejected archetypes and replaced them with luminary nature. Finally, Mullā Ṣadrā viewed the world of nature identical with renewal and change and maintained that the nature of substance enjoys permanent motion and flow. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        2 - Middle Platonism: Introduction and Analysis of Religious and Philosophical Theorems
        Mahbobeh  Hadina
        Middle Platonism is one of the most important philosophical-religious schools of the first century BC. While claiming to revive the original Platonic school, it is rooted in the fundamental epistemological and philosophical theorems of that time including the essence of More
        Middle Platonism is one of the most important philosophical-religious schools of the first century BC. While claiming to revive the original Platonic school, it is rooted in the fundamental epistemological and philosophical theorems of that time including the essence of the One, God as Creator, descent of the soul, rational knowledge, and salvation. A study of middle Platonists’ works reveals that the philosophical principles of this school are mainly based on a reinterpretation of certain religious-philosophical theorems of Platonic, Stoic, Pythagorean, and gnostic schools. In fact, a clear trace of the concern for explaining the problem of the oneness and transcendence of the essence of Almighty, the quality of the creation of the world, and the presence of evil therein can be witnesses in the works of the philosophers that advocate the mentioned schools. The fundamental principles of middle Platonism are basically religious, and this school is mainly concerned with such topics as the duality of the essence of divinity in two concepts, God as the Maker or Creator of the world, the duality of the spiritual and material origin of Man and the descent of the soul, cosmology and the material structure and fate of the world, eschatology with an emphasis on the theorem of Man’s salvation through rational knowledge, and finally the discussion of ethics and the definition of its practical frameworks for attaining rational perfection, which is necessary for salvation. The present paper aims to explain and provide a comparative analysis of the principles and quality of the formation of the philosophical theorems of Middle Platonism as a philosophical-religious school. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        3 - Philanthropia in Ancient Greece and its Relationship with Paideia
        Majid Mollayousefi Maryam Samadieh
        The 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 More
        The 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

        4 - Platonic and Aristotelean Roots of the Concept of Time in Islamic Philosophy
        Seyed Mohammad  Moosavi Baygi Mohammad Amin  Afzalzadeh
        Time is one of the most important features of the world of matter, and the knowledge of which has always attracted the attention of philosophers. The simplicity of perception of time and the difficulty of its explanation have resulted in some disagreements among philoso More
        Time is one of the most important features of the world of matter, and the knowledge of which has always attracted the attention of philosophers. The simplicity of perception of time and the difficulty of its explanation have resulted in some disagreements among philosophers concerning its definition. Islamic philosophers are no exception in this regard, and the roots of their disagreements go back to Plato’s and Aristotle’s different definitions of time. Plato defined time as a self-subsistent and essentially independent substance that is a differentiated form of the world of Ideas. In Aristotle’s view, time represents the number of motion from its priority and posteriority aspects, which cannot be gathered with each other. While acknowledging the difference between these two definitions, Islamic philosophers have usually chosen one of these definitions and tried to respond to the suspicions about their selected definition and reject the arguments in favor of the opposing one. Some philosophers such as Ibn Rushd, Ibn Sīnā, and Suhrawardī adopted Aristotle’s definition, while Zakarīyyā Rāzī and Fakhr al-Dīn Rāzī advocated Plato’s definition. Nevertheless, no effort as to demonstrating the contrast between Aristotelean and Platonic definitions of time is justified because both philosophers believe that although time is different from motion, their existences are inseparable from each other. In other words, the perception of one depends on the perception of the other. accordingly, the present paper, while clarifying Plato’s view, initially intends to explain that it is not in contrast to Aristotle’s view and, secondly, aims to demonstrate the effects of their view on those of Muslim philosophers. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        5 - A Study of the Historical Development of the Notion of Platonic-Aristotelean Agape and Love in Fārābī and Ṭūsī (In the Realm of Human Relationships)
        Fereshteh Abolhassani Niaraki
        The present study provides a description and analysis of the historical development of the notion of Aristotelean-Platonic agape (love) in the philosophical thoughts of Fārābī and Khwājah Nasīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī. Following a historical method, the author deals with the reason More
        The present study provides a description and analysis of the historical development of the notion of Aristotelean-Platonic agape (love) in the philosophical thoughts of Fārābī and Khwājah Nasīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī. Following a historical method, the author deals with the reasons behind this development in addition to describing it. The discussion of friendship (agape) in Aristotle’s philosophy is propounded in his Nichomachean Ethics, where some traces of Platonic notion are also observable. This discussion was transformed in Islamic Philosophy in certain respects, including the variety of the beloved (and the most beloved), individualistic or socialist aspect, and selfishness or selflessness aspect. Regarding the variety of the beloved, the discussion has moved from virtue-based friendship (agape) to the love of the Wise (God). As to its range, one can observe a change of dialog form social-political friendship to agape as an internal characteristic with individual and social effects. Moreover, it has moved beyond selfishness and selflessness and, in conformity with the principle of congruence, reached the love from Him (Godly). The influential views of such thinkers as Plotinus; the role of religion, culture, and gnosis, and the ideas of Ibn Sīnā, Ibn Miskawayh, and Suhrawardī are of great importance in explaining this development. The particular philosophical and Kalāmī principles of Fārābī and Ṭūsī as well as some of their ethical views are the most important factors in the interpretation of the underlying reasons of the mentioned development. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        6 - An Interpretation of the Dialogue of Laws from the Viewpoint of Leo Strauss Based on Fārābī’s Treatise of Talkhīṣ al-Nawāmīs
        Havva Jami Seyed Mohammad  Hakkak Qazvini Ali Naghi  Baghershahi Shervin Moghimi Zanjani
        Presently, historicism is the dominant approach in interpreting philosophical traditions. This approach considers each science, particularly philosophy, to be in some way related to the specific lifetime of thinkers. Within this framework, historicist interpreters exami More
        Presently, historicism is the dominant approach in interpreting philosophical traditions. This approach considers each science, particularly philosophy, to be in some way related to the specific lifetime of thinkers. Within this framework, historicist interpreters examine Plato’s works in relation to four different periods, with the dialogue of Laws belonging to the latest period of his life, indicating a change in his approach. However, in opposition to any kind of historicist view, Leo Strauss disagrees with this division and believes that there is no change of direction in Plato’s overall philosophy – from the first to the last dialogue – and all of them address philosophical problems from a specific standpoint. We encounter this comprehensive approach also in Strauss’ reading of the dialogue of Laws. In fact, Strauss believes that, in order to grasp a real understanding of the dialogue of Laws, one must follow his method and consider Fārābī’s interpretation of this work in Talkhīṣ al-nawāmīs as a basis. Strauss also maintains that it is the only way through which one can go beyond the limits of historical interpretation. While providing a brief discussion of the historical interpretation of the Laws, the purpose of the present study is to examine Fārābī’s interpretation of the dialogue of Laws, Strauss’ critique and view of this interpretation, and the most distinctive features of Strauss’ innovative interpretation of this dialogue. Manuscript profile