List of Articles مبناگرایی

• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  1 - a
  مجید توسلی رکن آبادی محمد شجاعیان
  Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  2 - sadr and rationalism
  emad tayebi mohammadmahdi meshkati
  Rationalism, in contrast to empiricism, means believing in priori knowledge and theorems. Sadr's two books, our philosophy and logical basis of induction have made a detailed analysis of epistemological perspectives, especially in the context of the rationalism-empirici More

  Rationalism, in contrast to empiricism, means believing in priori knowledge and theorems. Sadr's two books, our philosophy and logical basis of induction have made a detailed analysis of epistemological perspectives, especially in the context of the rationalism-empiricism challenge. Sadr introduces his epistemological doctrine as an inherent doctrine which is agree on belief to priori knowledge with rationalists, and believes the principle of refusal of contradictions priori, he based on realisem and abstraction teory , belives the principles of mathematics are priori too, but about causality, by expressing the distinction between rational and experimental causality, he statement rational causality at least is possible, but he don’t accept the self-explaining of the priori principle of induction, or the principle of non-repetition of the accident, and separates himself from the Aristotelian rationalists. Despite the differences between Sadr on some priori principles and epistemological reasoning with the rationalists, Consequently, he is a rational foundationalist. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  3 - ارزش و ساختار معرفت در فلسفه فارابی
  Mahdi Abbaszadeh
  «ارزش و ساختار معرفت»، از مباحث جدید در معرفت‌شناسی است. این مبحث همچنین از چالش‌انگیزترین مباحث معرفت‌شناختی بوده، ذهن همة معرفت‌شناسان معاصر را به خود مشغول داشته و آرا و نظرات مختلفی در باب آن عرضه شده‌اند. در ذیل این این، معمولاً به مسائلی همچون نظریة صد More

  «ارزش و ساختار معرفت»، از مباحث جدید در معرفت‌شناسی است. این مبحث همچنین از چالش‌انگیزترین مباحث معرفت‌شناختی بوده، ذهن همة معرفت‌شناسان معاصر را به خود مشغول داشته و آرا و نظرات مختلفی در باب آن عرضه شده‌اند. در ذیل این این، معمولاً به مسائلی همچون نظریة صدق، معیار حقیقت و خطا، نظریة توجیه، و بداهت پرداخته می‌شود. با اینکه این مبحث در معرفت‌شناسی معاصر در کانون توجه قرار گرفته و اهمیت بسیار یافته است، لیکن این بدان معنا نیست که فلاسفة اسلامی متقدم به آن نپرداخته یا متعرض آن نشده‌اند. بر این اساس، فارابی «مؤسس فلسفة اسلامی» در آثار مختلف خویش، برای نخستین بار در فلسفة اسلامی، به بحث پیرامون موضوعات یا مسائل فوق پرداخته است. در نوشتار حاضر نشان داده خواهد شد که او به عنوان یک متفکر واقع‌گرا، در مبحث نظریة صدق، قائل به مطابقت است و معیار تمییز حقیقت و خطا در شناخت بشری را تبیین نموده است؛ در نظریة توجیه، مبناگرایی در تصدیقات را برگزیده است؛ به مسئلة بدیهیات توجه داشته و ملاک و اقسام آن را دقیقاً برشمرده است. در انتهای نوشتار حاضر، دیدگاه‌های برخی از محققان در خصوص فارابی، ملاحظه، بررسی و احیاناً نقد خواهند شد. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  4 - An Analytical Study of Foundationalism in Epistemology of BonJour
  Isa Mousazadeh mahdi abbaszadeh
  One of the most important epistemological issues in the contemporary era is theories of justification. Justification briefly means providing the necessary proofs or evidences for the truth of a belief. Various theories have been proposed for justifying knowledge, two mo More

  One of the most important epistemological issues in the contemporary era is theories of justification. Justification briefly means providing the necessary proofs or evidences for the truth of a belief. Various theories have been proposed for justifying knowledge, two most important of which are foundationalism and coherentism. The various currents that have arisen in the contemporary Western period in the field of justification, have been the mainstay of epistemologists' tendency towards coherentism, which ultimately results in submission to epistemological relativism, which denies any definite and objective criterion for measuring knowledge. But foundationalism is the most important, serious, and long-standing approach to this trend. The present study aims to pay attention, strengthen and enrich the foundationalist approach and with a descriptive-analytical method examines the foundationalism in Lawrence BonJour 's thought. The authors conclude that BonJour defends the foundations of empirical knowledge by emphasizing the possibility of a direct confrontation between non-conceptual reality and the concepts describing that reality, but by accepting the role of justification for rational intuitions, he is practically inclined to a certain rationalism, and Finally, since he does not rule out the possibility of error in basic beliefs, he believes in moderate foundationalism. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  5 - Knowledge of God in Imam's traditions and its epistemological justification
  Mohammad Hosein Mahdavinejad Masoud Fekri Mohammad Hosein Emamijoo
  The epistemological explanation of the knowledge of God is certainly one of the most important and controversial in the philosophy of religion. One of the theories presented is primordial nature theology. The Imams (as) in their hadith family have largely spoken on the More

  The epistemological explanation of the knowledge of God is certainly one of the most important and controversial in the philosophy of religion. One of the theories presented is primordial nature theology. The Imams (as) in their hadith family have largely spoken on the knowledge of God by primordial nature. The innate knowledge of God in the expression of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) is such that God has placed His knowledge in the institution of all human beings and they have no involvement in obtaining this knowledge. In addition, a large group of verses and hadiths have made statements about monotheism that are based solely on narrated sources. The purpose of this research and its innovation is to examine the epistemological validity of propositions related to the knowledge of God based on the Qur'an and the traditions of the Ahl al-Bayt. Accordingly, among the theories of justification, the selected theory of this study is based on the moderate fundamentalism. The method of this article, in terms of theological propositions, is the method of library study (study of documents) and the descriptive-analytical method when the epistemological justification is considered.    Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  6 - The logic and structure of justification in the propositions of Islamic humanities (with emphasis on the verses of the Holy Quran)
  ramazan alitabar mahdi abbaszadeh
  از مهم‌ترین مسائل معرفت‌شناسی علوم انسانی (اسلامی)، مسأله معیارهای ثبوتی و اثباتی حجیت در سطح گزاره‌ها به‌ویژه ساختار و فرایند توجیه آنها است. گزاره‌های علوم انسانی، به دو دسته توصیفی و توصیه‌ای تقسیم‌ می‌شوند. پژوهش حاضر نشان داده است: در سطح ثبوتی، واقع‌نمایی گزاره‌ها More

  از مهم‌ترین مسائل معرفت‌شناسی علوم انسانی (اسلامی)، مسأله معیارهای ثبوتی و اثباتی حجیت در سطح گزاره‌ها به‌ویژه ساختار و فرایند توجیه آنها است. گزاره‌های علوم انسانی، به دو دسته توصیفی و توصیه‌ای تقسیم‌ می‌شوند. پژوهش حاضر نشان داده است: در سطح ثبوتی، واقع‌نمایی گزاره‌های توصیفی، در مطابقت آن‌ها با واقع و نفس الامر است؛ اما واقع‌نمایی گزاره‌های توصیه‌ای (ازجمله اعتباریات)، قدری متفاوت است؛ زیرا اعتباریات، تابع احتیاجات حیاتی و عوامل محیطی بشر بوده و به تبع سیر تکاملی زندگی اجتماعی، متغیراند؛ لذا برخی با پذیرش ناواقع‌نمایی در این حوزه، قائل به نسبیت شده‌اند، زیرا معتقدند اعتبار گزاره‌های اعتباری در علوم انسانی، وابسته به خواست و قرارداد جامعه است؛ در حالی که گزاره‌های اعتباری نیز دارای نفس الامراند و نفس الامر هر چیزی به حسب خودش است. همچنین معیار اثباتی حجیت گزاره‌های علوم انسانی و شیوه توجیه آنها عمدتاً بر مدار نظریه ابتناء (مبناگرایی) است. پژوهش حاضر می‌کوشد با روش عقلی و با بهره‌گیری از برخی آیات قرآن کریم، مسأله معیار صدق و ساختار توجیه انواع گزاره‌های علوم انسانی را نشان دهد. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  7 - Mulla Sadra’s Strong fundationalism and epistemic justification
  Bagher Gorgin Najaf Yazdani Ali Nasr abadi
  Strong foundationalism is considered as one of the theories of epistemic justification with a long-standing history. Most of traditional philosophers including Plato and Aristotle in Greece to the Muslim philosophers, rationalists and empiricists  in the modern cla More

  Strong foundationalism is considered as one of the theories of epistemic justification with a long-standing history. Most of traditional philosophers including Plato and Aristotle in Greece to the Muslim philosophers, rationalists and empiricists  in the modern classic era, and some contemporary philosophers have accepted this doctrine. Mulla Sadra is also a foundationalist epistemologically. It should be also pointed that the foundationalism in the western epistemology is based on a concentration on judgmental acquired knowledge rather than conceptual knowledge. It is assumed that the knowledge is merely a matter of judgment than conceptual.  However, Mulla Sadra’s view has been established when conceptual knowledge was in the center of attention and on the basis of this knowledge, sapiential knowledge has been considered.  For the most important reason for strong foundationalism is based on the notion of cognitive regress infinitum. He by acknowledging the foundationalism, has defended this theory. Mulla Sadra justified the knowledge by the self- evident knowledge and based on their clarity and distinct transparency, he tries to justify the other own beliefs. His approach to pass from self- evident knowledge to the speculative is in fact demonstrative syllogism completely adjust to the strong foundationalism. As a result, it could be claimed that Sadra's theory is susceptible to be unfettered from the problems such as non-standard basic propositions,  the limitation of the self- evident statements, the lack of common middle term in the self- evident propositions and the relationship between the self- evident and truth which could be also raised against foundationalism. However, Mullasadra’s existential outlook to the knowledge and  the role of knowledge in presence in his epistemology let him to answer the questions raising against the basic propositions. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  8 - Examining Avrom Stroll's point of view about Wittgenstein's two different understandings of the foundations of certain beliefs
  mohammad saied abdollahi Mohammad Ali Abdollahi
  Since the time of Aristotle, some philosophers have insisted on the point that a part of knowledge is more fundamental than other parts. There have been various forms of foundationalism in epistemology, ethics and logic, and each of them has considered a certain matter More

  Since the time of Aristotle, some philosophers have insisted on the point that a part of knowledge is more fundamental than other parts. There have been various forms of foundationalism in epistemology, ethics and logic, and each of them has considered a certain matter as the basis according to the field under discussion. Avrum Stroll believes that Wittgenstein is a fundamentalist, but his fundamentalism is completely different from the approach of traditional fundamentalists, and Wittgenstein's intelligent distinction between knowledge and its foundations keeps his fundamentalism away from the problems that traditional fundamentalists have. Stroll enumerates nine conditions for fundamentalism and believes that these nine conditions exist in Wittgenstein's epistemological system. He believes that Wittgenstein gives two different understandings of the basis of certain beliefs, one is relative (propositional) fundamentalism and the other is absolute (non-propositional) fundamentalism, and over time Wittgenstein moves away from relative fundamentalism and leans towards absolute fundamentalism. In this article, after clarifying Stroll's argument about Wittgenstein's fundamentalism and the difference between this fundamentalism and its traditional interpretations, we examine Stroll's distinction between Wittgenstein's two conceptions of fundamentalism and show what characteristics each of these two conceptions has and how Wittgenstein prefers the absolute fundamentalism and expands it. Manuscript profile