Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.
2
Assistant professor of Islamic Philosophy and Theology in university of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Mazandaran, Iran
3
- Mahdi Emami jome, Associated professor, Faculty of Islamic Philosophy, Department of Literature University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
10.22091/jptr.2024.11226.3119
Abstract
Axioms are crucial to epistemic frameworks, as several schools of the history of science have recognized. The current research issue is that in validating axioms, what defects does the intuitive approach entail, and how can the intersubjective approach (based on the ideas of Islamic philosophers) be explained as an alternative and less-known system? The first one is dedicated to clarifying and criticizing what is called the intuitive approach to validating axioms: this approach is attributed to classical philosophers. It consists of assuming that axioms are propositions whose truth is immediately evident upon taking into account the terms they are based on. The second part clarifies the alternative approach, called the intersubjective approach of validating axioms (IAVA): this approach is attributed to a specific Islamic tradition, developed by Avicenna and Mullā Ṣadrā, and consists of assuming that axioms are propositions that cannot be rationally proved, denied, or doubted, without being already assumed. We are presenting the intersubjective approach from a historical point of view.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)
Send comment about this article