University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Scientific Essentialism from Kripke to EllisScientific Essentialism from Kripke to Ellis12314769FAMaryamMoayerzadehPhD of Philosophy of Science, Sceiences and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, TehranMousaAkramiAssociate Professor of Philosophy of Sciences Department, Sciences and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran.Journal Article20131216Scientific essentialism is a metaphysical theory with its roots in Aristotelian tradition. According to this theory, some properties determine the nature of a physical entity. The proponents of such a view hold that all physical entities have their own essences. Denying the possibility of knowing the essences of the entities, some philosophers have criticized Aristotle essentialism. This criticism came to the peak with the denial of metaphysics in Logical Positivism. Essentialism was revived in a scientific appearance by philosophers such as Kripke and Putnam. Introducing a new metaphysics, Ellis contributed in revival of essentialism. This metaphysics was enriched with the concept of natural kind, such that the natural kinds and their essential features reached an important place in scientific essentialism. Introducing scientific essentialism and natural kind theses, the paper tries to show the capabilities of the philosophers’ views to defend the essentialism. The achievements of scientific essentialism are reflected in the topics such as possible worlds, distinction between analysis and semantics of dispositional properties, the problem of referring to these properties, and the problem that why it is not possible to reduce the structural universal to nonstructural universal.Scientific essentialism is a metaphysical theory with its roots in Aristotelian tradition. According to this theory, some properties determine the nature of a physical entity. The proponents of such a view hold that all physical entities have their own essences. Denying the possibility of knowing the essences of the entities, some philosophers have criticized Aristotle essentialism. This criticism came to the peak with the denial of metaphysics in Logical Positivism. Essentialism was revived in a scientific appearance by philosophers such as Kripke and Putnam. Introducing a new metaphysics, Ellis contributed in revival of essentialism. This metaphysics was enriched with the concept of natural kind, such that the natural kinds and their essential features reached an important place in scientific essentialism. Introducing scientific essentialism and natural kind theses, the paper tries to show the capabilities of the philosophers’ views to defend the essentialism. The achievements of scientific essentialism are reflected in the topics such as possible worlds, distinction between analysis and semantics of dispositional properties, the problem of referring to these properties, and the problem that why it is not possible to reduce the structural universal to nonstructural universal.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122The role of experience in Kuhn’s paradigmThe role of experience in Kuhn’s paradigm254414801FARezaSadeghiAssistantProfessor of Philosophy Department, University of IsfahanJournal Article20140308In Kuhn’s historical method there is no distinctive role for discovery and empiric data in emergence of scientific paradigm and development of normal science. Discovery is not an individual and unespected event. It is a social legecy and has no distinctive border with invention. like discovery, the empiric data is determined by paradigm and social education. In other hand Kuhn thinks that theory cannot be determined by observation and that for each observation a plural of theories are imaginable which all of them are consistant with that experience. In this essay we will argue that if an observation is theary laden it cannot be consistant with inconsistant theories, and that Kuhn’s view that paradigm is the precondition of any perception and his denying of observation-theory and discovery-invention distnctions are main backgrounds for a kind of relativism which include ontology.In Kuhn’s historical method there is no distinctive role for discovery and empiric data in emergence of scientific paradigm and development of normal science. Discovery is not an individual and unespected event. It is a social legecy and has no distinctive border with invention. like discovery, the empiric data is determined by paradigm and social education. In other hand Kuhn thinks that theory cannot be determined by observation and that for each observation a plural of theories are imaginable which all of them are consistant with that experience. In this essay we will argue that if an observation is theary laden it cannot be consistant with inconsistant theories, and that Kuhn’s view that paradigm is the precondition of any perception and his denying of observation-theory and discovery-invention distnctions are main backgrounds for a kind of relativism which include ontology.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Relation between Whole and Part in Leibnitz PhilosophyRelation between Whole and Part in Leibnitz Philosophy455814780FAZahraNoori SangedehiPhD Candidate of Philosophy, University of TehranJournal Article20140112Here, on the one hand, regarding to the fundamental idea of Leibniz’s philosophy, namely, «Substance”, we will try to study the different kinds of whole and part and their relationship. On the other hand, considering some principles of Leibniz’s philosophy such as; the principal of contradiction, the principle of sufficient reason, and the principle of harmony, we will consider the whole and part relationship with substance. The whole and part has either philosophical – ontological meaning or logical- epistemological one. The validity of the second meaning is because of the first one. The whole’s meaning in philosophy is not equal to its meaning in formal logic. Whole is an existence particular in which exist all the potentially qualities and modals, that is, an individual substance and monad that has a real unity. Whole and part are intertwined. On the one hand, the part is a part and at the same time, it is a whole in its unity, on the other hand. The whole also has both unity and parts.Here, on the one hand, regarding to the fundamental idea of Leibniz’s philosophy, namely, «Substance”, we will try to study the different kinds of whole and part and their relationship. On the other hand, considering some principles of Leibniz’s philosophy such as; the principal of contradiction, the principle of sufficient reason, and the principle of harmony, we will consider the whole and part relationship with substance. The whole and part has either philosophical – ontological meaning or logical- epistemological one. The validity of the second meaning is because of the first one. The whole’s meaning in philosophy is not equal to its meaning in formal logic. Whole is an existence particular in which exist all the potentially qualities and modals, that is, an individual substance and monad that has a real unity. Whole and part are intertwined. On the one hand, the part is a part and at the same time, it is a whole in its unity, on the other hand. The whole also has both unity and parts.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Study in Arthur's thesis about Marx's Being influenced by Hegel's Master-Servant in LaborStudy in Arthur's thesis about Marx's Being influenced by Hegel's Master-Servant in Labor597514813FAMojtabaSeifiPhD Candidate of Philosophy, University of IsfahanMohammadMeshkatAssistant Professor of Philosophy Department, University of Isfahan0009-0001-7982-9561Journal Article20140430Marx's being influenced by hegel is agreed and specially by master-servitude of Phenomenology of spirit however is famous ,for people like Arthur is a Myth. Sartre and Hyppolite who influenced by Kojeve, are creators of this famous theory but without any refrence.Marcuse just gived a citation of economic and philosophical manuscripts o 1844 so Arthur whit focus on it and critisim revoked the theory. his argument is that Marx never refers to this section of phenomenology . I argue that Marx uses the keywords of this section in another writings like grudrise and capital. furthermore the meaning of influence is obscure.Marx's being influenced by hegel is agreed and specially by master-servitude of Phenomenology of spirit however is famous ,for people like Arthur is a Myth. Sartre and Hyppolite who influenced by Kojeve, are creators of this famous theory but without any refrence.Marcuse just gived a citation of economic and philosophical manuscripts o 1844 so Arthur whit focus on it and critisim revoked the theory. his argument is that Marx never refers to this section of phenomenology . I argue that Marx uses the keywords of this section in another writings like grudrise and capital. furthermore the meaning of influence is obscure.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122The Relation of Intuition and Intelligence in Bergson's PhilosophyThe Relation of Intuition and Intelligence in Bergson's Philosophy778914788FAMohammadAnbarsoozPhD Candidate of Philosophy, University of TabrizJahangirMasooudiAssociate Professor, Ferdowsi University of MashhadJournal Article20140222One of the most ambiguous points of Bergson’s philosophy is the relationship of the intuition and intellect as two sources of human’s knowledge. Based on his conception of world as a dynamic and fluid thing, Bergson seeks for a reliable method to achieve the valid and infallible knowledge. Considering the duration as the truth of time, he not only regards the intuition to be useful for achieving knowledge, but also regards it as the only real method of achieving to the true knowledge. He holds the other methods as unreliable. In this inquiry, besides studying the elements of knowledge in Bergson’s philosophy in the light of the other components of his system, we will consider the essence, function, and interaction of intuition and intellect (which Bergson construes as intelligence). Moreover, we will demonstrate that while intuition is absolutely prior to intellect, it initially seems that these two sources of knowledge have various functions in two different realms. However, based on a more precise scrutiny, we will understand that according to Bergson’s view the combination of intuition and intellect and their reciprocal and evolutionary action brings about true knowledge for human being.One of the most ambiguous points of Bergson’s philosophy is the relationship of the intuition and intellect as two sources of human’s knowledge. Based on his conception of world as a dynamic and fluid thing, Bergson seeks for a reliable method to achieve the valid and infallible knowledge. Considering the duration as the truth of time, he not only regards the intuition to be useful for achieving knowledge, but also regards it as the only real method of achieving to the true knowledge. He holds the other methods as unreliable. In this inquiry, besides studying the elements of knowledge in Bergson’s philosophy in the light of the other components of his system, we will consider the essence, function, and interaction of intuition and intellect (which Bergson construes as intelligence). Moreover, we will demonstrate that while intuition is absolutely prior to intellect, it initially seems that these two sources of knowledge have various functions in two different realms. However, based on a more precise scrutiny, we will understand that according to Bergson’s view the combination of intuition and intellect and their reciprocal and evolutionary action brings about true knowledge for human being.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Aesthetic logic of Communicative Rationality in Habermas’s Thoughts and Its Relation with Kant's Critique of the Power of Judgment and Adorno's Modern ArtAesthetic logic of Communicative Rationality in Habermas’s Thoughts and Its Relation with Kant's Critique of the Power of Judgment and Adorno's Modern Art9111014775FAAbdolamjeedMoballeghiAssistant Professor, Islamic Sciences and Culture Institute (ISCA)Journal Article20131224This paper aims to provide an aesthetic foundation for Jürgen Habermas’s theory of “Communicative Rationality”. It argues that Immanuel Kant's “Critique of the Power of Judgment” and his unique understanding of aesthetics is efficiently useful in illustrating the logic beyond that Habermas’s innovative theory of communicative rationality. Also it investigates the claimed relation between Theodor Adorno’s explanation of modern art and Habermas’s solutions for getting over the unwelcomed self-alienation process within the contemporary society. Finally it suggests that Adorno’s attention to independent art, unlike Kant’s explanation of aesthetics, is not helpful in shedding light on hidden aesthetic aspects of “communicative rationality”.This paper aims to provide an aesthetic foundation for Jürgen Habermas’s theory of “Communicative Rationality”. It argues that Immanuel Kant's “Critique of the Power of Judgment” and his unique understanding of aesthetics is efficiently useful in illustrating the logic beyond that Habermas’s innovative theory of communicative rationality. Also it investigates the claimed relation between Theodor Adorno’s explanation of modern art and Habermas’s solutions for getting over the unwelcomed self-alienation process within the contemporary society. Finally it suggests that Adorno’s attention to independent art, unlike Kant’s explanation of aesthetics, is not helpful in shedding light on hidden aesthetic aspects of “communicative rationality”.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Ethics and Mind Theory in Stich's Philosophy; Moral Psychology and Cognitive Sciences UnitedEthics and Mind Theory in Stich's Philosophy; Moral Psychology and Cognitive Sciences United11113514850FAMohammad HadiFazeliM.A. in Philosophy of Religion, University of TehranAhadFaramarz GharamalekiProfessor of Philosophy, University of TehranJournal Article20140621Stephen stich is one of the most outstanding psychologist and philosophers in the both ethics and mind fields. He merged psychological and philosophical traditions into one and also became the source of so much studies in moral psychology and philosophy of mind. This article claimed that theory of mind, theory of world and theology of every philosopher will construct their moral theory. By such a treatment, we will first analyze the meta-ethics of stich’s theory in both ontological and epistemological aspects and then we will find the metaphysical connections between his mind theory and ethics. At the end we will mention how such a cognitive and non-dualistic approach can shape those aspects and give stich a permission to overcome folk psychology and find his way into cognitive psychology and experimental approaches in constructing his ethical theory.Stephen stich is one of the most outstanding psychologist and philosophers in the both ethics and mind fields. He merged psychological and philosophical traditions into one and also became the source of so much studies in moral psychology and philosophy of mind. This article claimed that theory of mind, theory of world and theology of every philosopher will construct their moral theory. By such a treatment, we will first analyze the meta-ethics of stich’s theory in both ontological and epistemological aspects and then we will find the metaphysical connections between his mind theory and ethics. At the end we will mention how such a cognitive and non-dualistic approach can shape those aspects and give stich a permission to overcome folk psychology and find his way into cognitive psychology and experimental approaches in constructing his ethical theory.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Imanation system of Suhrawardi and disputes on itImanation system of Suhrawardi and disputes on it13715114725FAMansourImanpourAssociate Professor of Islamic Philosophy, Shahid Madani University of Azarbaijan, Tabriz, Iran/0000-0001-5424-2038Journal Article20131120The creation is one of important issues in Islamic philosophy. Suhrawadi in this area provide a new view. he explained this problem by the terms of illumination and observation and light and darkness. He" unlike avisina and al- farabi believed that lights are numerous.He believed that the first heaven(falak) is issued from the first Light and the second heaven(falak) issued by the participation of all Lights and other heavens are created by Platonic Ideas. Suhrawardi believed that other creatures are created by Ideas.this Suhrawardi,s view is very mysterious and considerable. In this paper we try to consider and investigate him view .The creation is one of important issues in Islamic philosophy. Suhrawadi in this area provide a new view. he explained this problem by the terms of illumination and observation and light and darkness. He" unlike avisina and al- farabi believed that lights are numerous.He believed that the first heaven(falak) is issued from the first Light and the second heaven(falak) issued by the participation of all Lights and other heavens are created by Platonic Ideas. Suhrawardi believed that other creatures are created by Ideas.this Suhrawardi,s view is very mysterious and considerable. In this paper we try to consider and investigate him view .University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122A Comparative Study on First Source According to Avicenna & LeibnizA Comparative Study on First Source According to Avicenna & Leibniz15316614777FAMahdiDehbashiProfessor of Philosophy Department, University of IsfahanZahraZoofaghariMA Student of Philosophy, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.Journal Article20131224First Source of beings and argument for his existence is one of the important problem of philosophy. The present research is a comparative study on First Source according to Avicenna and Leibniz. First Avicenna’s proof of the truthful and Leibniz’s proof of sufficient reason is been expressed. Then the causation of First Source is been studied. The conclusion of this research is: both of these proofs is based on contingency and necessity proof, but Avicenna’s proof is based on existence division, while Leibniz’s proof is based on truth division. In view point of Avicenna first cause is efficient cause and of Leibniz is a source of efficient and final causes. The First Source in both of Avicenna and Leibniz philosophy is true and conservative cause.First Source of beings and argument for his existence is one of the important problem of philosophy. The present research is a comparative study on First Source according to Avicenna and Leibniz. First Avicenna’s proof of the truthful and Leibniz’s proof of sufficient reason is been expressed. Then the causation of First Source is been studied. The conclusion of this research is: both of these proofs is based on contingency and necessity proof, but Avicenna’s proof is based on existence division, while Leibniz’s proof is based on truth division. In view point of Avicenna first cause is efficient cause and of Leibniz is a source of efficient and final causes. The First Source in both of Avicenna and Leibniz philosophy is true and conservative cause.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Critical approach of Averroes about the use of reason and its Presence in the western philosophical thinkingCritical approach of Averroes about the use of reason and its Presence in the western philosophical thinking16718114783FASajjadYousefiPhD Candidate of Philosophy of Education, Research Institute of Hawzeh and UniversityJournal Article20140211Averroes’ Rationalism is one of the influential components of the Western philosophy. One of the central aspects of his rationalism is his criticism of the limits of using the reason. This study has been reviewed the deep of this criticism and its presence in the philosophical thought of the West. The research method, on the one hand, is analyzing the content and the genealogy of the issue on the other hand. Here I try to clarify the Islamic and Western philosophy relationship in this case, and the interactions between both approaches.Averroes’ Rationalism is one of the influential components of the Western philosophy. One of the central aspects of his rationalism is his criticism of the limits of using the reason. This study has been reviewed the deep of this criticism and its presence in the philosophical thought of the West. The research method, on the one hand, is analyzing the content and the genealogy of the issue on the other hand. Here I try to clarify the Islamic and Western philosophy relationship in this case, and the interactions between both approaches.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Empirical Phenomenon, Subjective Construction And Ontological Trught (An Analysis of Problems of Scientific Explanation and Critical Realism Approach)Empirical Phenomenon, Subjective Construction And Ontological Trught (An Analysis of Problems of Scientific Explanation and Critical Realism Approach)18320214758FAFaramarzTaghilouAssistant Professor of Political Sciences Department, University of TabrizJalalPeykaniAssistant Professor of Philosophy Department, Payam Noor University.Journal Article20131209Both the positivist and negativist frameworks of explanation share in this naturalist proposition that against the metaphysical philosophy, reality is embedded only in experimental level and therefore the scientific explanation of natural and social phenomenon should refer to this experimental level in order to be called meaningful, verifiable and scientific. But, the problem was always that the principle of causality as a necessary condition for every kind of scientific explanation is not logically deductable from induction in experimental level and remains as a metaphysical principle. On the other hand, the principle of experimental objectivity as a condition for the verifiability clause of scientific explanations, could not be defended, because the experimentation was always embedded in subjectivity and theory. The Kantian idealist, in contrast, see the scientific explanation as a mere representation of reality in subjective categories, could not justify the experimental knowledge of reality and the rationality for comparison among theories and paradigms. Critical Realism as an important approach in philosophy of science that relates to works and thoughts of Roy Bhaskar, is to solve this problems by resorting to its principles of ontological realism, epistemological relativism and judgmental rationality. The aim of this article is to study the Critical Realist position on scientific explanation and analyze that who in the Critical Realist interpretation of scientific explanation, experimental phenomenon, subjective construction and ontological reality all reach to a logical coherence with each other.<br /><br />Key Words: Explanation, Positivism, Negativism, Kantian Idealism, Critical Realism.Both the positivist and negativist frameworks of explanation share in this naturalist proposition that against the metaphysical philosophy, reality is embedded only in experimental level and therefore the scientific explanation of natural and social phenomenon should refer to this experimental level in order to be called meaningful, verifiable and scientific. But, the problem was always that the principle of causality as a necessary condition for every kind of scientific explanation is not logically deductable from induction in experimental level and remains as a metaphysical principle. On the other hand, the principle of experimental objectivity as a condition for the verifiability clause of scientific explanations, could not be defended, because the experimentation was always embedded in subjectivity and theory. The Kantian idealist, in contrast, see the scientific explanation as a mere representation of reality in subjective categories, could not justify the experimental knowledge of reality and the rationality for comparison among theories and paradigms. Critical Realism as an important approach in philosophy of science that relates to works and thoughts of Roy Bhaskar, is to solve this problems by resorting to its principles of ontological realism, epistemological relativism and judgmental rationality. The aim of this article is to study the Critical Realist position on scientific explanation and analyze that who in the Critical Realist interpretation of scientific explanation, experimental phenomenon, subjective construction and ontological reality all reach to a logical coherence with each other.<br /><br />Key Words: Explanation, Positivism, Negativism, Kantian Idealism, Critical Realism.University of TabrizJournal of Philosophical Investigations2251-796081520141122Immortality in view of Maimonides and SpinozaImmortality in view of Maimonides and Spinoza20321914844FAMortezaShajariAssociate Professor of Philosophy, University of TabrizYousefNozohourAssociate Professor of Philosophy, University of Tabriz0000-0003-0515-3236AbbasFanni AslPhD Candidate of Philosophy, University of TabrizJournal Article20140609Desire for immortality can be seen as the essential natural impulse. Therefore, different religions and thinkers have attempted to see the issue from different viewpoints. The great Jewish philosopher. Maimonides, due to deep fixation to Judaism, has tried to express their issues to be consistent with the Bible and his own community believes. He, in his discussion of resurrection, believed to three basic steps: The Messiah, the resurrection, and the world hereafter. His standpoint of eternity is dedicated to the hereafter. And we can be immortalized only by acting and teachings in accordance with the Bible and righteousness. Like Maimonides, Spinoza – the other Jewish philosopher - considered the immortality as Ultimate bliss through which the “immutable and eternal love of God" can be achieved. In his opinion, a person reaches this stage, when the lusts and emotions can reasonably be overcome, and also, when the power and anger and contempt and disregard others will respond with love and dignity. Thus, a man can be reached its proper perfection and immortality is reached. The difference between these two philosophers is that Maimonides believes through "actual intellect" -that is Emanation of the active intellect- can be immortalized but, for Spinoza, eternity can be reached through the adequate Ideas.Desire for immortality can be seen as the essential natural impulse. Therefore, different religions and thinkers have attempted to see the issue from different viewpoints. The great Jewish philosopher. Maimonides, due to deep fixation to Judaism, has tried to express their issues to be consistent with the Bible and his own community believes. He, in his discussion of resurrection, believed to three basic steps: The Messiah, the resurrection, and the world hereafter. His standpoint of eternity is dedicated to the hereafter. And we can be immortalized only by acting and teachings in accordance with the Bible and righteousness. Like Maimonides, Spinoza – the other Jewish philosopher - considered the immortality as Ultimate bliss through which the “immutable and eternal love of God" can be achieved. In his opinion, a person reaches this stage, when the lusts and emotions can reasonably be overcome, and also, when the power and anger and contempt and disregard others will respond with love and dignity. Thus, a man can be reached its proper perfection and immortality is reached. The difference between these two philosophers is that Maimonides believes through "actual intellect" -that is Emanation of the active intellect- can be immortalized but, for Spinoza, eternity can be reached through the adequate Ideas.