آدرس سابق «دغدغه های اخلاق و دین» / سید حسن اسلامی

آدرس جدید: HassanEslami.com

۳۰ مطلب در فروردين ۱۳۹۲ ثبت شده است

‌اعتبار منطق ارسطو در تفکر معاصر غرب
سید حسن اسلامی
دانشیار دانشگاه ادیان و مذاهب


منطق ارسطویی به مثابه بخشی از فلسفه اسلامی، در میان مسلمانان مخالفان بسیاری داشته است که می‌کوشیده‌اند تا بی‌اعتباری منطق را بر ملا سازند. در نتیجه بخشی از فعالیت فیلسوفان و منطق‌دانان مسلمان دفاع از منطق و اعتبار آن در برابر مخالفان بوده است. در کنار انتقادات رایج و کهنی که در کتاب‌های مدافعان منطق پاسخ‌ آن‌ها را می‌توان یافت، به تازگی برخی مدافعان مکتب تفکیک به نام علم جدید و روش علمی مقبول در نظام‌ غرب، به نقد منطق ارسطویی دست زده و آن را بی‌ارج و مانع رشد علمی جوامع اسلامی بر شمرده‌ و مدعی شده‌اند غربی‌ها با کنار نهادن منطق ارسطو و پیروی از منطق تجربی فرانسیس بیکن، پیشرفت کردند. نوشته حاضر این ادعا را تحلیل کرده و به استناد داوری منطق‌دانان، مورخان، و فیلسوفان متعددی نتیجه گرفته است که منطق ارسطو همچنان در مجامع علمی غرب و نظام آموزشی آن جایگاهی ارجمند دارد و بخشی از منطق معاصر به شمار می‌رود. مسئله رشد غرب نیز نه به دلیل تبعیت از منطق تجربی بیکن، بلکه به دلایلی دیگر، از جمله تغییر نگرش به طبیعت، بوده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها: منطق ارسطویی-نقدها، فلسفه اسلامی-نقدها، نقد منطق، فرانسیس بیکن، مکتب تفکیک، اخلاق پژوهش.

دریافت
حجم: 390 کیلوبایت
_______________________________
با تشکر از دکتر اسدالله فلاحی که در وبلاگشان به این مقاله و «سیری در استدلال بی مغالطه» لینک داده اند.

The Status of Aristotelian logic in contemporary Western thought
Seyed Hassan Eslami Ardakani
Associate professor at University of Religions and Denominations
 
Abstract
Aristotelian logic, as a part of Islamic philosophy, from the very beginning has been attacked by some opponents amongst Muslims. So, some of Muslim philosophers have attempted to defend it against the criticisms raised by these opponents, and strengthen its validity. Beside the old criticisms, recently some Shi'a scholars under the name of Maktebe Tafkik, (The Separation School) have raised new criticisms against Aristotelian logic, claiming that this system of logic has been refuted and abandoned in the Academic circles of the West and has been replaced by the scientific method introduced by Francis Bacon. Therefore, based on some faulty arguments, they call for letting Aristotelian logic aside. This article tries to evaluate this claim and show its falsehood.

Keywords: Aristotelian logic, Maktebe Tafkik, Neo-Akhbari thought, Bacon, Islamic philosophy.
 Theological-Philosophical Research, 2011(Issue 3)

کتاب ماه فلسفه فروردین ماه امسال (شماره 67، 1392) پرونده‌ای به فلسفه علم اختصاص داده است، که کاری ستودنی است. در این پرونده، اولین فصل کتاب فلسفه علم: درآمدی بسیار کوتاه* ترجمه شده و طی هفت صفحه آمده است. درباره این اقدام چند نکته گفتنی است.

این نوشته معرفی کتاب زیر است:
Religion in an Age of Science, Ian G. Barbour, (The Gifford Lectures 1989-1991, v. 1) New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1990, 297 P.

دریافت
حجم: 234 کیلوبایت
چاپ شده در شماره 40 فصلنامه هفت آسمان، 1387.

Mulla Sadra and the problem of plagiarism; a reevaluation of apologies

Mulla Sadra, or Sadr Al-din Muhammad Shirazi (c. 979/1571-1050/1640) is the founder of Hekmate Mota'liea school of thought and one of the most important Shi'a philosophers in Iran during three past centuries. He attempted to synthesize the rival schools of thought in his period. The result was bringing into being a new synthesis that later was known as Hekmate Mota'liea or the "Transcendent Philosophy" or as some contemporary thinkers prefer, "Transcendent Theosophy". He was prolific author and wrote many significant books, including Al-Asfar Alaqliea Al-Arba'a, or the Four Intellectual Journeys.
More than one hundred years agoAbo Al-Hassne Jelwe, an Iranian philosopher and a famous exponent of Ibne Sina's philosophy, revealed Mulla Sadra's huge indebtedenss to other philosopher's works, without acknowledging it properly.
The problem was that Mulla Sadra had borrowed the exact words, sentences, paragraphs, and in some cases the whole chapters of famous thinkers' works, such as Al-Ghazzali and Al-Razi's books, while he did not mention them appropriately or citing them correctly. So, he was accused of committing plagiarism, by his opponents. To invalidate this accusation, his followers and defenders tried to justify, or in some cases rationalize, his deed by proposing some apologies. According to one of them, for example, plagiarism was not a morally wrong in his period, and according to the other, the borrowed sentences and sections were trivial information and common knowledge, not genuine thoughts.
The author of this paper, first of all, has gathered and classified these apologies into six types. Secondly, has attempted to show that all them are insufficient and cannot prove anything in Mulla Sadra's interest. Finally, the author has come to the conclusion that the accusation of plagiarism that is launched against Mulla Sadra is still powerful and cannot be defeated easily.

This paper (in Farsi)  is published in: Ayeneh-ye- Pazhoohesh, vol. 22, no.5,  Des 2011-Jan 2012.

I delivered this speech at "Figurations and Conceptions of Evil in Different Religious Contexts," Interdisciplinary and Interreligious Workshop at the Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, 19-21 September 2012.

Rumi and the soul-making of evil

 

Prof. Seyyed Hassan Eslami Ardakani, URD, Qom, member of faculty

  

Jalal al-din Muhammad al-Balkhi, or as he is well-known in the West "Rumi," is one of the greatest mystical Persian poets. He actually represents the mystical interpretation of Islam and tries to give a unified understanding of its teaching from a Sufi outlook. As a mystic and Sufi thinker, Rumi has much in common with Muslim philosophers and theologians, but at the same time he has his authentic way for dealing with Islamic teachings and confronting problems he faces as a thinker.

His impact and heritage is so deep and profound that after more than seven hundred years of his death (indeed he passed away in 1273 A.D), no thoughtful Muslim can ignore his mystical poems. For instance, in the contemporary Iran, most people of letter and educated persons, even those who oppose mysticism strongly, quote his poems in their writings and use them orally. His impact is not confined to Persian-speaking world; Quite the contrary, his fame and impact is spreading throughout the world.

To solve the problem of evil and to answer some relevant questions, Rumi combines theoretical and philosophical thoughts and arguments with metaphorical and poetical language and then he puts them in long poetical narrations and old fables. As a result, any sophisticated reader can appreciate his thoughtful assertion, while ordinary readers can enjoy his poems and accept his claims.

In my paper, I have discussed Rumi's approach for confronting evil, and have come to a conclusion summarized as below:

1. Good and evil have one origin and are created by one God. So, the Magians, or Zoroastrians, who believe in two sources for good and evil, are mistaken.

2. Evil is willed by God, and without his will no evil would appear in the world.

3. There is no absolute or pure evil in the world and even the worst evil that we can imagine, is in some respect good. At least it is good for itself. In short, good and evil are inseparable.

4. Therefore, good and evil are relative and to name one particular thing as good or evil depends to our outlook. For instance, the poison of the snakes look evil to us, as humans, but it is doubtless good for them and a vital element of the snake life.

5. Furthermore, some sorts of evil are useful for our self-purification.

6. Besides, evil, in some situations, can be a warning from God to us, inviting us to pause and think about our deeds and behaviors.

7. Some sorts of evil, is within our own nature as humans. Indeed, many of wrongdoings are brought in the world by our choice. Since, our souls, as Rumi describes, are sleeping dragons by our actions we awaken them and bring evil to the world. 

8. And finally, Rumi invites us, as adult persons who seek spiritual development and evolution, to welcome all kinds of evil which we face in our lives and look at them as opportunities and instruments for self-actualization. From this viewpoint, evil is a gift sent to us from God, in disguise.

Ethics and Gender in ‘the best women virtues’ Hadith

Seyyed Hassan Eslami Ardakani, URD, Qom

Are men and women different in main moral virtues? There is a famous Hadith, attributed to Imam Ali (P.B.U.H) that states, “The best women virtues are the worst men virtues: pride, meanness, and cowardice”. Based on this accepted saying, some Muslim scholars have defended the ethical difference between men and women. This article tries to asses this Hadith and its trueness in seven sections. In the first section, the differences between narrations of this saying in various old Hadith books are reported. The second section reports and analyzes what the interpreters have told about this Hadith. In the third section I deal with the scientific foundations of this allegedly biological and social separation between two sexes. The fourth section deals with the so-called feminist ethics and tries to show that we can not base ethics on sexual differences. In the fifth section I have argued that this Hadith can not be defended by other ethical Hadiths and Quranic teachings. The six section traces the content of this Hadith in ancient Greek, Persian, and Arab cultures to show that it is not really Imam Ali’s saying. In the seven and final section I recommended three basic principles to deal with the Hadiths concerning women. The conclusion of this essay is that this Hadith is forged and attributed wrongly to Imam Ali.        

Keywords: Islamic ethical virtues, feminine virtues, feminist ethics, ethical Hadiths, masculine virtues.

This paper is published in: ULUM-I-HADITH; FALL 2008 - WINTER 2009; pp.47-87. (Downloadable in Farsi)
شِپارد هاریسون در تحقیق بر سینماروهای مختلف با توجه به جایی که ترجیح می‌دهند در سینما بنشینند، شخصیت آن‌ها را در چهار گروه جای می‌دهد. گروه نخست، نظاره‌گران یا ناظران هستند که خود را از حادثه جدا می‌کنند و فیلم را برای خودشان می‌بینند (Detached observers). آنان در کناری قرار می‌گیرند و فاصله خود را حفظ می‌کنند. گروه دوم، کسانی که شیفته صفوف جلو هستند و می‌خواهند با دیگران فیلم ببینند، نه برای خودشان. آنان برونگرا، رقابتی و متعصب هستند. گروه سوم کسانی که در وسط می‌نشینند و منعطف هستند. و گروه چهارم، شورشیان نادیدنی (Invisible rebels) که در دوردست می‌نشینند بی آن که خودنمایی کنند. البته برای برخی صندلی صرفاً جایی برای نشستن است و هر جا بود می‌نشینند.
گفتنی است این تحقیق در جایی واقعنما است که تعداد صندلی بیش از بلیطهای فروخته شده باشد و امکان انتخاب فراهم باشد.
 
Shepard, Harrson, "At the movies. You are where you sit: Seating choice can tell a lot about a person, Los Angeles Daily News, 10 July 2001.

قلب ذن؛ درسهایی برای مشفقانه زیستن، هفت آسمان، شماره 43، پاییز 1388.

در این نوشته کتاب زیر را معرفی و مطالب آن را مرور کرده ام:

Ezra Bayda (2008), Zen Heart: Simple advice for Living with Mindfulness and Compassion, Boston & London: Shmbhala, pp.198.


می توانید فایل پی.دی.اف مقاله را دریافت کنید.

دریافت
حجم: 301 کیلوبایت

درس اول: از موانع سخت به نرمی بگذر

این گل‌ها در حیاط دانشگاه و  مسیر رفت و آمد سر برزده و می‌خواهند بشکوفند.

[پس نوشت: امروز، 2 روز  بعد از گرفتن این عکس، متوجه شدم که این گلها را از ریشه در آورده اند.  ظاهراً زمختی آنها پای عابران را می آزرد.]