The Question of ‘How Are Synthetic A Priori Judgments Possible’ in Contemporary Islamic Philosophy | ||
| پژوهش‌های فلسفی -کلامی | ||
| دوره 27، شماره 1، فروردین 1404، صفحه 59-78 اصل مقاله (923.68 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22091/jptr.2025.11948.3210 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| ُSeyed Ali Taheri Khorramabadi* | ||
| Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy of science, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| According to Kant, the lack of progress in metaphysics is due to the fact that philosophers tried to solve metaphysical problems without examining the limits of our reason, and the outcome of these endeavors has been a dogmatic metaphysics fraught with contradictions and tensions. Then, after examining the types of cognition, he concludes that in order to determine the limits of reason's capacity, one must answer the question: “How are synthetic a priori judgments possible?” Some contemporary Islamic philosophers have sought to answer this question inspired by the teachings of Islamic philosophy. One solution involves resorting to conceptual relations that make the synthetic a priori judgments possible, while another solution is to deny outright the a priori/a posteriori and analytic/synthetic distinctions of cognition. In this paper, using a comparative-analytical method, I demonstrate that these two solutions are unsuccessful. The proposed alternative is to consider the possibility of such propositions as fundamental and in no need of further explanation. This suggestion seems to be simpler and fully consistent with the teachings of Islamic philosophy. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| synthetic؛ a priori؛ accidental؛ self-evident؛ primary | ||
| موضوعات | ||
| معرفت شناسی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The Question of ‘How Are Synthetic A Priori Judgments Possible’ in Contemporary Islamic Philosophy | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| ُSeyed Ali Taheri Khorramabadi | ||
| Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy of science, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| According to Kant, the lack of progress in metaphysics is due to the fact that philosophers tried to solve metaphysical problems without examining the limits of our reason, and the outcome of these endeavors has been a dogmatic metaphysics fraught with contradictions and tensions. Then, after examining the types of cognition, he concludes that in order to determine the limits of reason's capacity, one must answer the question: “How are synthetic a priori judgments possible?” Some contemporary Islamic philosophers have sought to answer this question inspired by the teachings of Islamic philosophy. One solution involves resorting to conceptual relations that make the synthetic a priori judgments possible, while another solution is to deny outright the a priori/a posteriori and analytic/synthetic distinctions of cognition. In this paper, using a comparative-analytical method, I demonstrate that these two solutions are unsuccessful. The proposed alternative is to consider the possibility of such propositions as fundamental and in no need of further explanation. This suggestion seems to be simpler and fully consistent with the teachings of Islamic philosophy. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| synthetic, a priori, accidental, self-evident, primary | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Audi, R. (2011). Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Avicenna (Ibn Sina). (2012). Al-Shifaʾ:Mantiq, vol. 3 (Kitab al-burhan). Manshurat Maktabat Ayatollah al-Uzma al-Marashi al-Najafi. [In Arabic].
Avicenna (Ibn Sina). (2014). Al-Isharat wa al-tanbihat. (N. D. Tusi, Ed. (Part 1: Logic)). Nashr al-Balaghah. [In Arabic].
BonJour, L. (2010). Epistemology: Classical problems and contemporary responses (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Ghaffari, H. (2007). Barrasi-yi intiqadi va tatbiqi-yi falsafeh-yi nazari-yi Kant: Barrasi-yi mabadi-yi falsafeh-yi naqqadi va bahthi dar mahiyyat va imkan-i qazaya-yi tarkibi-yi pishini. Muassasa-yi Intisharat-i Hekmat. [In Persian].
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of Pure Reason, (tP. Guyer & A. W. Wood, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
Lemos, N. (2007). An introduction to the theory of knowledge. Cambridge University Press.
Mesbah Yazdi, M. T. (2004). Amuzesh-i falsafeh, vol. 1. Amir Kabir Publications. [In Persian].
Motahhari, M. (1996). Majmuʿa-yi athaar, vol. 9. Sadra Publications. [In Persian].
Motahhari, M. (2011). Usul-I falsafeh va ravish-i realism, vol. 5. Sadra Publications. [In Persian].
Motahhari, M. (2018). Sharh-i mabsut-i manzumeh, vol. 1. Sadra Publications. [In Persian].
Qavam Safari, M.2007 (1386). Ma baʿd al-tabiʿah chegunah mumkin ast. Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought Publication Institute. [In Persian].
Razi, Q. D., & Katibi Qazvini, N. D. (2003). Tahrir al-qawaʿid al-mantiqiyya fi sharh al-risala al-shamsiyyah. Intisharat Bidar. [In Arabic].
Shirazi, S. M. (Mulla Sadra). (1990). Al-Hikma al-utaʿaliyah fi al-asfar al-ʿaqliyyat al-arbaʿah, vol. 1. Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi.[In Arabic].
Taheri Khorramabadi. A. (2019). Late Islamic philosophy and knowledge by presence. Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 21(4), 129-152. https://doi.org/10.22091/jptr.2019.4351.2121. [In Persian].
Tusi, N. D. (1988). Asas al-Iqtibas. Intisharat Daneshgah Tehran. [In Arabic].
Tusi, N. D.,, & Hilli, J. D. (2014). Al-Jawhar al-nadid. Intisharat Bidar. [In Arabic].
Ubudiyyat, A. R. (20041383). Ithbat-i Khoda be ravish-i asl-i mawzuʿie. Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute Publications. [In Persian] | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 57 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 46 |
||