درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The relation of causal necessity with free will has been a source of great debate in the history of philosophy and theology. However, in recent years, it has also been discussed in the science of Usul al-Fiqh. After explaining the compatibility of causal necessity with free will, Ākhūnd Khurāsānī speaks of the 'shattering of his pen.' Two interpretations have been given for this statement. Muḥaqqiq Iṣfahānī considers the theory of compatibility that Khurāsānī presented as being correct. However, he interprets the 'shattering of the pen' to be a reference to another matter, i.e., the problem of the recompense of an agent in the case where causal necessity is accepted. His explanation of the aforementioned compatibility and the permissibility of the recompense of sinners has been evaluated in this article. On the contrary, Muḥaqqiq Na'ini considers the 'shattering of the pen' to be a reference to the problem of the conflict between causal necessity and free will. He says that aside from the popular preliminaries of free will, such as knowledge and intention (which are the products of causal necessity), there is a need for something that he calls 'talab'-a noetic action that stems from the governance of the soul. He considers this talab to fall outside the scope of causal necessity. This paper seeks to examine the views of these two illustrious students of Ākhūnd Khurāsānī so that the various Usuli dimensions of this discussion can be clarified.

Consequent upon .Africans' denialfa rational men!ali!J f:y ear!J European anthropologists, ethnographers, sociologists and religious scholars, through some so-called 'Theories of the primitive people': ma,ry .African scholars eJpecial91 · in the jield ofphilosophy rose to the challenge of articulating a distinct philosopl?J for their people to combat their mental and intellectual denigration. H oueier, due to the challe1zges posed f:y modern civilization, disagreement arouse concerning the focus and contents of African philosopy. This paper examines the background to the challenges of having a viable definition of .African philosopfy. It concludes that /lfricc111 philosopl!J mus: encompass basic attributes of philosopy S11ch as reflection, conaptual analysis and criticism. But above all, these attribntes must be applied lo African needs and wqys of Ifft, which mqy not he <geo<graphical!J limited.

kripke bas proposed a number of counteretxamples to the classic thesis, which ays that the class of necmary fropositions roincidn with the cla1ss of a priori ones. These counteretxamples involve some necessary a posten'ori trutbs as well as contingent a priori ones. Om cfbis exmnplu far the loller is the 1ta11dard metre example. In thi1 paper, after presenting a brief sketch of Kripke'1 proposal, I'll exan,ine the main ohjution1 to it and argue !hat all of them co,t!d be replied to. At the end, ho,vever,argue that the standard metre example enjoy1 much Im philosopbical significance than it appears to,and,considering the sprit,it of the clauic tbesis, it faill to rif,1tt tbiI tbesis.

Critical rationalism faces difficulty in Karl Popper’s Socratic formulation: “I may be wrong, and you may be right, and by an effort, we may find the truth.” But the Socratic elenchus, using refutations, can only give us negative knowledge of general principles, which is not the wisdom we seek. Affirmatively, we can only find a collection of opinions to be coherent, which is one of many. Francis Bacon proposed an improved elenchus to find general truths. You must take up a limited topic to study, then cross-examine your evidence for and against its apparent nature. Experiments contrary to evidence and presumed knowledge are entered as self-contradictions in tables of opposition recorded in an “experimental and natural history.” Such an account highlights a challenging puzzle if the account is to be made coherent. With enough problematized evidence, a coherent reading, or a solution of the puzzle, will be unique. Being both coherent and unique, it will be the truth about that limited reality being investigated. Unlike the method of hypothesis (“Anticipating Nature”), deciphering a coherent model is “Interpreting Nature,” allowing us to find a general truth on a limited topic. Isaac Newton achieved great success using Robert Boyle’s mechanistic version of this method. Using the “experimental philosophy,” he discovered general principles of optics and astronomy.