<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<ags:resources xmlns:ags="http://purl.org/agmes/1.1/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:agls="http://www.naa.gov.au/recordkeeping/gov_online/agls/1.2" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
<ags:resource>
					<dc:title><![CDATA[Discussion of the Principality of Existence:
Confusion of Epistemology and Ontology]]></dc:title>
					<dc:creator>
					<ags:creatorPersonal><![CDATA[Ahmadi, Ahmad]]></ags:creatorPersonal>

			</dc:creator>
			<dc:publisher>
				<ags:publisherName><![CDATA[University of Qom]]></ags:publisherName>
			</dc:publisher>
			<dc:date><dcterms:dateIssued><![CDATA[2005]]></dcterms:dateIssued></dc:date>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[existence]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[essence]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[principality of existence]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[principality of essence]]></dc:subject>
			<dc:description>
				<ags:descriptionNotes><![CDATA[Includes references]]></ags:descriptionNotes>
				<dcterms:abstract><![CDATA[In the arduous discussion of the principality  of existence (asālat al-wujūd) or the principality of essence (asālat al-māhiyya), it is necessary first to examine the proposition which is the cornerstone of this discussion; second, it should be discussed how its conception can cause its acknowledgement; then we can clarify the significance of existential proposition; and finally, setting forth the meanings of the  word “existence” and those of the  word “essence” or “quiddity”, it would appear the signs of confused discussion of epistemology and ontology.

 ]]></dcterms:abstract>
			</dc:description>
            <dc:identifier scheme="dcterms:URI"><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_299_ca42853fca31e7cd691bf9d8ef745293.pdf]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:identifier scheme="ags:DOI"><![CDATA[10.22091/pfk.2005.299]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:type><![CDATA[Journal Article]]></dc:type>
			<dc:format><dcterms:medium><![CDATA[text]]></dcterms:medium></dc:format>
			<dc:language><![CDATA[فارسی]]></dc:language>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/]]></dc:source>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[Journal of Philosophical Theological Research]]></dc:source>
		</ags:resource>
<ags:resource>
					<dc:title><![CDATA[Divine Treasuries]]></dc:title>
					<dc:creator>
					<ags:creatorPersonal><![CDATA[Heshmatpūr, Muhammad Husayn]]></ags:creatorPersonal>

			</dc:creator>
			<dc:publisher>
				<ags:publisherName><![CDATA[University of Qom]]></ags:publisherName>
			</dc:publisher>
			<dc:date><dcterms:dateIssued><![CDATA[2005]]></dcterms:dateIssued></dc:date>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[treasuries]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[keys of sacred Knowledge]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[key of treasury]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[treasurers]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Preserved Tablet]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Tablet of Effacement and Affirmation]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Divine Area]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[intellectual realities]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[immaterial intellects]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[descent]]></dc:subject>
			<dc:description>
				<ags:descriptionNotes><![CDATA[Includes references]]></ags:descriptionNotes>
				<dcterms:abstract><![CDATA[Since the word “treasuries” has been mentioned in the Koran and Hadiths, scholars of the interpretation of the Koran and Hadiths as well as theologians, philosophers and Gnostics have discussed it from several aspects. In this paper, we first interpret it literally, formulating the scholars’ opinions about it; then, we develop the discussion to the “key of treasury” and “treasurers”; finally,  to make clear the philosophical-theological perspective in addition to the interpretation of the issue. we attempt to discuss the points mentioned among the scholars’ utterances.

 ]]></dcterms:abstract>
			</dc:description>
            <dc:identifier scheme="dcterms:URI"><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_300_35d45af9bea6f535b237523d7ab3415e.pdf]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:identifier scheme="ags:DOI"><![CDATA[10.22091/pfk.2005.300]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:type><![CDATA[Journal Article]]></dc:type>
			<dc:format><dcterms:medium><![CDATA[text]]></dcterms:medium></dc:format>
			<dc:language><![CDATA[فارسی]]></dc:language>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/]]></dc:source>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[Journal of Philosophical Theological Research]]></dc:source>
		</ags:resource>
<ags:resource>
					<dc:title><![CDATA[Discussion of the Principality of Existence:
Confusion of Epistemology and Ontology]]></dc:title>
					<dc:creator>
					<ags:creatorPersonal><![CDATA[Akbariān, Reza]]></ags:creatorPersonal>

			</dc:creator>
			<dc:publisher>
				<ags:publisherName><![CDATA[University of Qom]]></ags:publisherName>
			</dc:publisher>
			<dc:date><dcterms:dateIssued><![CDATA[2005]]></dcterms:dateIssued></dc:date>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[existence]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[essence]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[principality of existence]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[principality of essence]]></dc:subject>
			<dc:description>
				<ags:descriptionNotes><![CDATA[Includes references]]></ags:descriptionNotes>
				<dcterms:abstract><![CDATA[In the arduous discussion of the principality  of existence (asālat al-wujūd) or the principality of essence (asālat al-māhiyya), it is necessary first to examine the proposition which is the cornerstone of this discussion; second, it should be discussed how its conception can cause its acknowledgement; then we can clarify the significance of existential proposition; and finally, setting forth the meanings of the  word “existence” and those of the  word “essence” or “quiddity”, it would appear the signs of confused discussion of epistemology and ontology.

 ]]></dcterms:abstract>
			</dc:description>
            <dc:identifier scheme="dcterms:URI"><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_301_1705ba3b068575f00265edebef735c12.pdf]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:identifier scheme="ags:DOI"><![CDATA[10.22091/pfk.2005.301]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:type><![CDATA[Journal Article]]></dc:type>
			<dc:format><dcterms:medium><![CDATA[text]]></dcterms:medium></dc:format>
			<dc:language><![CDATA[فارسی]]></dc:language>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/]]></dc:source>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[Journal of Philosophical Theological Research]]></dc:source>
		</ags:resource>
<ags:resource>
					<dc:title><![CDATA[Causal Inference and Proofs of Theism in Hume's Philosophy of Religion]]></dc:title>
					<dc:creator>
					<ags:creatorPersonal><![CDATA[Fatali Khāni, Mohmmad]]></ags:creatorPersonal>

			</dc:creator>
			<dc:publisher>
				<ags:publisherName><![CDATA[University of Qom]]></ags:publisherName>
			</dc:publisher>
			<dc:date><dcterms:dateIssued><![CDATA[2005]]></dcterms:dateIssued></dc:date>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[causation]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[causal inference]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[probability calculus]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Bayes’ theorem]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Argument from design]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Argument from miracles]]></dc:subject>
			<dc:description>
				<ags:descriptionNotes><![CDATA[Includes references]]></ags:descriptionNotes>
				<dcterms:abstract><![CDATA[Using probability calculus, David Hume attempts to judge religious beliefs properly. He, in using this calculus, relies on especial views about causation and causal inference. For him, specific causal relationships between phenomena appear to us through frequent observation of the succession or coexistence of certain phenomena. The result of this observation is a natural, unavoidable association between those phenomena. All associations of this sort are not of the same force and intensity; they are forceful if the observations occur incessantly and steadily, otherwise they are less forceful. The probability calculus helps us to show the probability of the occurrence of a certain phenomenon in case of observing each of the coexisting phenomena. To do this calculation, Hume pays special attention to variables such as posterior probability (or conditional probability) and prior probability, which can be considered as the primitive form of a law or formula known nowadays as Bayes’ theorem. Using Bayes’s theorem, Hume arrives at the conclusion that the Argument from design can not be fruitful, nor can be the Argument from miracles. The present article, which indeed deals with a discussion of Hume’s philosophy of religion, proves that Hume, in this conclusion, is subject to fallacy and begging the question.
 ]]></dcterms:abstract>
			</dc:description>
            <dc:identifier scheme="dcterms:URI"><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_302_8534db1fcc201d7a054078a4b48c3ecd.pdf]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:identifier scheme="ags:DOI"><![CDATA[10.22091/pfk.2005.302]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:type><![CDATA[Journal Article]]></dc:type>
			<dc:format><dcterms:medium><![CDATA[text]]></dcterms:medium></dc:format>
			<dc:language><![CDATA[فارسی]]></dc:language>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/]]></dc:source>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[Journal of Philosophical Theological Research]]></dc:source>
		</ags:resource>
<ags:resource>
					<dc:title><![CDATA[A Glance at Mutahari’s Theoretical Challenges
To ‘Allāmah Tabātabā’ī’s Philosophical Opinions]]></dc:title>
					<dc:creator>
					<ags:creatorPersonal><![CDATA[Nasri, Abdullāh]]></ags:creatorPersonal>

			</dc:creator>
			<dc:publisher>
				<ags:publisherName><![CDATA[University of Qom]]></ags:publisherName>
			</dc:publisher>
			<dc:date><dcterms:dateIssued><![CDATA[2005]]></dcterms:dateIssued></dc:date>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[motion]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[contingency]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[ontological argument]]></dc:subject>
			<dc:description>
				<ags:descriptionNotes><![CDATA[Includes references]]></ags:descriptionNotes>
				<dcterms:abstract><![CDATA[Morteza Mutahari is well-known as the exponent of ‘Allamah Tabātabā’ī’s viewpoints; however, reflecting on his works, one can find different aspects of his personal understandings, some of which are in contrast to ‘Allāmah Tabātabā’ī’s views. The present article seeks to figure out some challenges of these two thinkers in the field of philosophical discussions. Some of the challenges are concerned with: mediating movement, necessity of subject in motion, motion by subordination, motion and evolution, motion and conflict, bearer of potentiality, essential contingency, ontological argument, divine wisdom, purposefulness of creation, employment principle, universality of moral judgments, immortality of moral judgments, and necessity of community .
 ]]></dcterms:abstract>
			</dc:description>
            <dc:identifier scheme="dcterms:URI"><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_303_29317fc93f6f80edb6cf5cd5c3431037.pdf]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:identifier scheme="ags:DOI"><![CDATA[10.22091/pfk.2005.303]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:type><![CDATA[Journal Article]]></dc:type>
			<dc:format><dcterms:medium><![CDATA[text]]></dcterms:medium></dc:format>
			<dc:language><![CDATA[فارسی]]></dc:language>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/]]></dc:source>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[Journal of Philosophical Theological Research]]></dc:source>
		</ags:resource>
<ags:resource>
					<dc:title><![CDATA[Hermeneutics, Its Backgrounds and Developments]]></dc:title>
					<dc:creator>
					<ags:creatorPersonal><![CDATA[Mūsavi, Sayyid Muhammad]]></ags:creatorPersonal>

			</dc:creator>
			<dc:publisher>
				<ags:publisherName><![CDATA[University of Qom]]></ags:publisherName>
			</dc:publisher>
			<dc:date><dcterms:dateIssued><![CDATA[2005]]></dcterms:dateIssued></dc:date>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[philosophy of science]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[Hermeneutic circle]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[epistemology]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[ontology]]></dc:subject>
				<dc:subject><![CDATA[understanding]]></dc:subject>
			<dc:description>
				<ags:descriptionNotes><![CDATA[Includes references]]></ags:descriptionNotes>
				<dcterms:abstract><![CDATA[In the 2oth century, the important developments in the history of philosophy of science are: the first debate, Positivism and Inductivism; the second debate, Karl Popper’s Refutationism and Lakatos’s research program; the third debate, Thomas Kuhn’s Structuralism and relativism; and the forth debate, Hermeneutics. After dominating Hermeneutics in the field of philosophy of science, a fundamental development occurs in its methodology. One can classify the types of Hermeneutics from two points of view: 1) its application; 2) its historical period. This paper is going to deal with the influential backgrounds of Hermeneutics as well as to present a brief account of the types of Hermeneutics.
 ]]></dcterms:abstract>
			</dc:description>
            <dc:identifier scheme="dcterms:URI"><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_304_6036d42219c48cd2b696a545f713011d.pdf]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:identifier scheme="ags:DOI"><![CDATA[10.22091/pfk.2005.304]]></dc:identifier>
			<dc:type><![CDATA[Journal Article]]></dc:type>
			<dc:format><dcterms:medium><![CDATA[text]]></dcterms:medium></dc:format>
			<dc:language><![CDATA[فارسی]]></dc:language>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[http://pfk.qom.ac.ir/]]></dc:source>
			<dc:source><![CDATA[Journal of Philosophical Theological Research]]></dc:source>
		</ags:resource>

</ags:resources>