درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

It is widely affirmed that human beings have irreplaceable valuable, and that we owe it to them to treat them accordingly.  Many theorists have been drawn to Kantianism because they think that it alone can capture this intuition.  One aim of this paper is to show that this is a mistake, and that Kantianism cannot provide an independent rational vindication, nor even a fully illuminating articulation, of irreplaceability.  A further aim is to outline a broadly Aristotelian view that provides a more fitting theoretical framework for this appealing conception of human value.  This critique of Kantianism extends to contemporary theorists with a broadly Kantian orientation, including Christine Korsgaard, Stephen Darwall and John Rawls.  The problem with these views, at heart, is that they attempt to ground morality in respect alone.  Yet it is love, not respect, that brings irreplaceability into view.  The paper closes with a sketch of a virtue-theoretic theory that follows Aquinas in taking love to be a master virtue that refines the other virtues so as to ensure a continuous and practically efficacious sensitivity to the irreplaceable value of fellow human beings.

According to The Phenomenology of Spirit , the religion and philosophy are considered as important stages of the history of consciousness, and the absolute spirit is to become self-conscious of itself, as spirit, in the process of genesis of these two stages. The central issue of the present article is answering the following questions: “What relationship does Hegel establish between delicacies of religion and philosophy?” “Are religion and philosophy considered, in his thought, as double truths for each of which separate realms exist or these two are different stages of one single truth that express the spirit’s self-consciousness of itself in two stages?” To answer these questions, the writer attempts to show, through a descriptive-analytical method, how Hegel offers a theoretical explanation for substituting the image of national and ethnic religion for its traditional image by making the absolute affair to the ethnic spirit. Besides, it shows how Hegel – unlike the transcendental philosophy and exalted philosophy – on the one hand turns God and absolute spirit from non-understandable ideas to cognitive and conceptual ones, and on the other hand, removes – in this way – the duality of the realm between religion and philosophy and establishes an internal relationship between them. Through creating a dialectic relationship between religion and philosophy, he finds the possibility to remove the contrast between the myth and the realm of systematic knowledge. And by making it close to the framework of system of knowledge, he introduces the myth not in contrast to rational knowledge, but as the outset of the way whose truth the rational knowledge is going to explain.

In the interpretation, translation and esoteric interpretation of the Holy Qur’an, we are faced with free translation and non-adherence to some subtleties. Among the rhetorical matters, omission, connection, division, simile, metaphor and irony, etc. have been used extensively. Therefore, the translator must be completely careful and fluent in this matter. Another issue before us is the diversity and differences in the translation and interpretation of the Holy Qur’an. Two cultures, two tastes, and two different times influence translation approaches, and these can affect both the tastes of the creators and the recipients. Therefore, in this research, these controversial points have been pointed out. This research intends to use the descriptive-analytical method with the aim of explaining the translation approach with the focus on two Qur’anic translators and thinkers, namely Mousavi Garmaroudi and Abu al-Futūḥ Rāzī. The purpose of this study is to prove the hypothesis that in the translations and interpretations of the Qur’an by Garmaroudi, the language is close to the language of the people, smooth and fluent. But the translation of Abu al-Futūḥ Rāzī is the first translation and interpretation presented in the Dari language and he first brings the translation of a part of the verses, then he interprets them.