• List of Articles Quiddity

      • Open Access Article

        1 - Historical Development and Pre-Suppositions of the Theory of the Principiality of Existence in Tusi’s Analysis
        Hashem  Ghorbani
        The theory of the principiality of existence or quiddity lacks a systematic model in pre-Sadrian thoughts; however, it is based on certain presuppositions the discovery of which can illuminate Muslim thinkers’ approach to this problem. Khwajah Nasir al-Din Tusi has expl More
        The theory of the principiality of existence or quiddity lacks a systematic model in pre-Sadrian thoughts; however, it is based on certain presuppositions the discovery of which can illuminate Muslim thinkers’ approach to this problem. Khwajah Nasir al-Din Tusi has explained his epistemological ideas regarding these presuppositions. This paper deals with some of the presuppositions underlying the principiality of existence or quiddity as presented by Tusi. Some of them are as follows: 1) the problem of the addition of existence and quiddity and its quality; 2) detecting the relationship between existence and quiddity; 3) the mind or the outside as the place of the realization of this relationship, and 4) evaluating the referents of the mentioned analysis and the realization of quiddity and existence in the outside or emphasizing the exclusive realization of one of them. Through his analyses of each of these presuppositions, Tusi adopts an approach which can represent his agreement or disagreement with the principiality of existence. Accordingly, although the theory of the principiality of existence did not occupy his mind as a problem, his epistemological presuppositions regarding existence and quiddity are consistent with it. The development of the relationship between the ideas of Tusi and Mulla Sadra can be analyzed through explaining the former’s standpoints regarding the above-mentioned presuppositions and his influence over Mulla Sadra. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        2 - Suhrawardi’s Background in Advocating Mentally-Positedness of Existence
        Mahmoud  Hedayatafza Zeynab  Bostani
        Suhrawardi explicitly confirmed the “mentally-positedness of existence” in his most important works. He had correctly concluded the “external occurrence of existence to quiddity” from the works of Farabi and Ibn Sina and, while criticizing some of Ibn Sina’s words, had More
        Suhrawardi explicitly confirmed the “mentally-positedness of existence” in his most important works. He had correctly concluded the “external occurrence of existence to quiddity” from the works of Farabi and Ibn Sina and, while criticizing some of Ibn Sina’s words, had adduced several arguments for his own view. However, some contemporary scholars, when analyzing his standpoints, have ignored his background regarding the mentally-positedness of existence and introduced him as the first person who advocated this view. In the present paper, after a brief account of Farabi’s and Ibn Sina’s arguments concerning the relationship between existence and quiddity in possible things, the authors have analyzed Suhrawardi’s critical approach to this issue and then referred to three different sources for his belief in the mentally-positedness of existence. His hidden sources in this regard consist of some of the words of Bahmanyar and Omar Khayyam which he has quoted without citing the names of these two scholars in order to support his own arguments for the mentally-positedness of existence. His obvious source is a text written by Ibn Sahlan Sawi in al-Mashari’ wa’l-mutarihat. Since the philosophy section of Hakim Sawi’s book is not available, one cannot correctly judge the quality and quantity of the influence of above-mentioned thinkers on Suhrawardi. Nevertheless, available evidence demonstrates the certainty of his frequent adaptations of Bahmanyar’s works on the rejection of the “external objectivity of existence”. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        3 - On the Translation of Aristotle’s Ousia as Substance
        Hamid Khosravani Hamidreza  Mahboobi Arani Seyyed Mohammad Ali Hodjati
        Aristotle’s discussion of the Ousia are diverse and confusing since there are various definition of the term especially in Metaphysics, Physics and Categories. He refers to it sometimes as the underlying layer, sometimes he means something similar to the meaning of bein More
        Aristotle’s discussion of the Ousia are diverse and confusing since there are various definition of the term especially in Metaphysics, Physics and Categories. He refers to it sometimes as the underlying layer, sometimes he means something similar to the meaning of being, and sometimes as essence and quiddity. Hence, the difficulty and disagreement among the translators and interpreters on the best equivalent for Ousia in other languages. In the present paper, after a short historical discussion about Ousia, I examine some common equivalents for the Ousia in Latin and English and attempt to discuss the different reasons for and against each equivalent. My argument, in general, goes for the term Substance, and I will bring 8 reasons to establish the argument. Manuscript Document