Quarterly of the History of Philosophy
Volume 9
Farabi's Innovation Concerning the Relationship between Religion and Philosophy: The Hierarchical Theory of Religious Language
Nawab Mogharebi and Qasim Purhassan
What demands serious attention in Farabi's philosophy is his discussion of imagination and philosophy of prophethood, which is by no means adapted from Greek sources. Although some Orientalists try to find a Greek root for Farabi's ideas about uniting religion and philosophy and paving the way for faith, whether the traces of his endeavors are found in the works of Greek philosophers or not. According to him, a prophet receives effusion form the Active Intellect through imagination (in its most general sense), while a philosopher does so through the intellect. He also adds that the language of philosophy is demonstration, while religious language is rhetoric. These statements are unprecedented in Greek philosophy and are among Farabi's philosophical innovations.
The purpose of the present paper is to demonstrate that, if we pay attention to Farabi's efforts concerning the unity of the thoughts of Plato and Aristotle as well as the unity of religion and philosophy in the light of modern theological views (Wittgenstein-Kierkegaardian views) about the relationship between the intellect, faith, and also the language of religion, we can conclude that they have led to the rise and development of an innovative method in the field of religious language which can be called the "hierarchical theory of religious language". This theory can also cast a new light on modern theological problems in the field of religious language, particularly the conflict between advocating fideism and rationalism, and open a new horizon in this regard before our eyes.
Key Terms
Farabi Orientalists
imagination revelation
religious language relationship between religion and philosophy
hierarchical theory of language
***
A Critical and Comparative Study and Analysis of Modern and Traditional Rationalism
Hossein Zamaniha
Generally speaking, rationality can be defined as placing an idea on the basis of a set of universal and comprehensive criteria and principles which are necessarily true. Reason is also a power and faculty by which man can discover these necessary criteria and principles. From the view point of traditional rationalism, these primary principles are some external realities which the external world also obeys. The human being can also discover these realities through their connection with a universal intellect (the active intellect) which is itself the cause or the mediator in creating the realities in a way. However, according to modern rationalism, such primary realities and principles are the products of the interaction between the mind and the outside world, and we can never claim that the external world in the sense of what is other than the thinking mind of an existent follows and obeys these realities. Rather, we can only say that the external world obeys these rules and principles only when they are presented to the mind. Therefore, modern rationalism totally denies the effects of external factors on the process of intellection. Hence, it can be said that the modern mind is a self-subsistent reason. Descartes begins his philosophy by saying, "My thought begins from me", and it is at this point that he separates his way from traditional rationality.
Comparing to traditional rationalism, one of the other features of modern rationalism, whose advocates usually emphasize and place as one of its strengths before traditional rationalism, is its critical nature as opposed to the dogmatic nature of the traditional one. Nevertheless, more profound inspection reveals that when this critical nature, which is manifested in the form of the reason's self-criticism, is placed beside self-rootedness, not only is it not a privilege for modern rationality, but it turns into one of the most important challenges before it. From this point of view, the position of traditional rationalism is more defendable than that of the modern one.
Due to the same lack of internal incoherence in modern rationality, it has encountered an undeniable dead end. Now, the way out of this crisis is either to enter the domain of post-modernism, which inevitably leads to some other problems and criticisms, or to return to the source, which is only possible by reference to a kind of Eastern thought. The writer believes that this return can be observed in the works of Heidegger, who is himself one of the critics of modernism.
Key Terms
traditional rationalism modernism
modern rationalism critique
Eastern thought
***
Active Intellect in Aristotle and its Consequences based the Interpretations of Johannes Philoponus and Ibn Rushd
Hassan Fathi and Bayan Karimi
The idea of the active intellect in Aristotle's philosophy was initially developed in order to oppose Plato's philosophy. Aristotle believes in the distinction between two types of intellect in the rational soul: the passive intellect, which is the receptacle for all intelligible things, and the active intellect, which grants actuality to them. Because of their connection with religious principles, the lack of community, immateriality, impassivity, thoughtfulness, and immortality are among the most important qualities that have attracted the attention of some interpreters. Johannes Philoponus and Ibn Rushd are two of the most prominent interpreters of Aristotle's book On the Soul. Each of them, while accepting all these attributes, has provided various and, sometimes, contradictory interpretations of the place of the active intellect in Aristotle's view and explained and expanded this problem based on their own philosophical and religious ideas. From among the consequences of the quality of the interpretation of these attributes by these two interpreters, we can refer to the acceptance or rejection of the divine nature of the active intellect and its separation from the soul. Ibn Rushd acknowledges the separation of the active intellect from the human soul and its divinity. By contrast, Johannes Philoponus maintains that this intellect exists in the human soul and rejects its divinity. In spite of these two different positions on the active intellect, both have concluded the immortality of the intellect and, as a result, the immortality of the human soul after death. This point indicates the religious concerns of these two interpreters in the interpretation of Aristotle's ideas.
Key Terms
Aristotle Johannes Philoponus
Ibn Rushd the Soul
the intellect the active intellect
immortality
***
A Study of Zurvani and Isma'ilite Cosmology (based on the Works of Nasir Khusraw Qubadiyani)
Zabihullah Fathi Fath
The creation of the world and its quality has always promoted some questions in the human mind, and many schools of philosophy have tried to respond to them since long ago. In this way, they have provided two general views: one group believes that the world of being has been created directly by the Origin of creation, and another group believes that it has been done indirectly. Two Iranian schools, Zurvanism and Isma'iliyyah, which belong to two different periods, one to some thousand years before Islam and the other to the Islamic period, have discussed this problem.
Given the immense influence of Islma'ilite influence on Islamic philosophy and Sufism, after presenting two general ideas about the creation of the world in the Introduction, the writer has discussed the zurvani and Isma'ilite cosmology by reference to the works of Nasir Khusraw Qubadiyani, one of the great figures of the Isma'ilite school. Here, he has examined the ideas of the zurvanite and Isma'ilite concerning creation and its purposes. Then he has tried to demonstrate that the Isma'ilite cosmology has been influenced by zurvani cosmology.
Key Terms
cosmology zurvanisim
Isma'iliyyah Nasir Khusraw
***
A Theoretical Evaluation of the Relationship between Ethics and Politics in Zoroaster and Aristotle (A Comparative Study of the Gathas of Avesta and the Sixth book of the Nicomachean Ethics)
Muslem Abbasi and Hatam Qaderi
The purpose of this research was to provide a theoretical evaluation of the relationship between ethics and politics in Zoroaster and Aristotle. This subject can lead to some important achievements in terms of understanding the similarities and differences between ancient Iranian and classical Greek ideas of political and ethical order. In this way, we would be able to perceive the reasons for the differences in the political and ethical orders in Iran and the West until the recent period. This comparative evaluation revealed that for both Zoroaster and Aristotle ethics and politics always work with each other in order to create a good life full of justice based on the definition that each of them provides for "good" and "end". However, for Zoroaster, based on the priority of heavenly good to political good, ethical and political norms are devised in order to attain the end of "Ahura Mazda's creation", i.e. protecting the "Asha". On the other hand, for Aristotle, they are determined in relation to "man's" end, i.e. a "thoughtful life" depending on the happiness of the "polis" or the city.
Key Terms
Zoroaster Aristotle
ethics politics
***
On the Possibility and Desirability of "Reverse History of Philosophy
Mas'ud Umid
Presently, asking questions about the history of philosophy is as important and significant as inquiring about the common and internal problems of each school of philosophy. This paper focuses on the question of the possibility of going beyond the common approach to the history of philosophy. In line with this problem, it also asks: Could we speak of an alternative approach, such as the "reverse or retrospective history of philosophy alongside the direct approach to this field? Another related question could be: Is the second approach desirable enough? By the direct history of philosophy, we mean approaching the history of philosophy following a common liner direction, moving from the past towards the present and future. On the other hand, by the reverse history of philosophy we mean approaching historical events following a temporally linear direction but from the present towards the past.
This paper argues that it is possible to replace the common and direct approach to the history of philosophy with an innovative approach titled "reversed history of philosophy". Thus it is necessary that before treading on the path of philosophy, we should move through the stages of reading (reviewing), profound understanding, conducting research, teaching and learning, and compiling in our study of the history of philosophy in a reverse or retrospective rather than direct or prospective manner.
Accordingly, through distinguishing between three levels of possibility (conventional, logical, and philosophical) and presenting some axioms, here the writer first deals solely with the "philosophical possibility" of this approach. Second, by reference to several pieces of evidence and indications, he acknowledges the "philosophical possibility" and desirability of this approach.
Key Terms
history of philosophy direct approach
reverse approach possibility of the reverse approach
***
Aristotelian Reading of Hegel and Hegelian Reading of Aristotle in the Formation of a "Work of Art"
Ahmad Reza Mo'tamidi
When comparing poetry and history, Aristotle refers to the universal approach to art against the particular approach to history in recording events. He considers poetry to be of a more philosophical nature, since it enjoys a general and philosophical slant. A poet goes beyond facts and what has happened in reality and deals with what "might" have happened. A poet's talent and genius allow him to discover the potentials and possibilities of things and phenomena. In his philosophical system and dialectical logic, Hegel bases art on the unity of subject and object and its mediating between them. The historical phenomenon of spirit in the formation of a work of art is rooted in the knowledge of the "possibility" and "potency" of phenomena. An imitation of a particular act and a particular affair in a pale theatrical mould and a practical system means ascending to the general proposition of tragedy. Artistic creation has before itself the discovery of the possibilities of objects, moving from particularity towards universality, processing a particular and unique work of art, moving from universality towards particularity, and the hierarchical manifestation of the soul in the artistic phenomenon. What places Hegel, a later teacher of philosophy, beside Aristotle, an early teacher of philosophy, over an almost 2000-year historical interval, is his meticulous and analytic attention to the process of the formation of a work of art and its capacity for being shaped. When Hegel says that whenever we stand before a work of art, it is as if we are witnessing a level of spirit, in an Aristotelian reading, it means that we are standing before an aspect of "possibility" which some artistic ingenuity has previously promoted from the level of potency to "actuality".
Key Terms
possibility spirit
universal particular
subject object
genius content
work of art