University of QomJournal of Philosophical Theological Research1735-979172620051222Discussion of the Principality of Existence:
Confusion of Epistemology and OntologyDiscussion of the Principality of Existence:
Confusion of Epistemology and Ontology41829910.22091/pfk.2005.299FAAhmadAhmadiJournal Article20150819In 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.
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.
https://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_299_ca42853fca31e7cd691bf9d8ef745293.pdfUniversity of QomJournal of Philosophical Theological Research1735-979172620051222Divine TreasuriesDivine Treasuries194630010.22091/pfk.2005.300FAMuhammad HusaynHeshmatpūrJournal Article20150819Since 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.
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.
https://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_300_35d45af9bea6f535b237523d7ab3415e.pdfUniversity of QomJournal of Philosophical Theological Research1735-979172620051222Discussion of the Principality of Existence:
Confusion of Epistemology and OntologyDiscussion of the Principality of Existence:
Confusion of Epistemology and Ontology478630110.22091/pfk.2005.301FARezaAkbariānJournal Article20150819In 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.
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.
https://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_301_1705ba3b068575f00265edebef735c12.pdfUniversity of QomJournal of Philosophical Theological Research1735-979172620051222Causal Inference and Proofs of Theism in Hume's Philosophy of ReligionCausal Inference and Proofs of Theism in Hume's Philosophy of Religion8711830210.22091/pfk.2005.302FAMohmmadFatali KhāniJournal Article20150819Using 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.
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.
https://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_302_8534db1fcc201d7a054078a4b48c3ecd.pdfUniversity of QomJournal of Philosophical Theological Research1735-979172620051222A Glance at Mutahari’s Theoretical Challenges
To ‘Allāmah Tabātabā’ī’s Philosophical OpinionsA Glance at Mutahari’s Theoretical Challenges
To ‘Allāmah Tabātabā’ī’s Philosophical Opinions11714030310.22091/pfk.2005.303FAAbdullāhNasri0009-0005-0285-491XJournal Article20150819Morteza 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 .
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 .
https://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_303_29317fc93f6f80edb6cf5cd5c3431037.pdfUniversity of QomJournal of Philosophical Theological Research1735-979172620051222Hermeneutics, Its Backgrounds and DevelopmentsHermeneutics, Its Backgrounds and Developments14115630410.22091/pfk.2005.304FASayyid MuhammadMūsaviJournal Article20150819In 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.
<em> </em>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.
<em> </em>https://pfk.qom.ac.ir/article_304_6036d42219c48cd2b696a545f713011d.pdf