Hamidreza Ayatollahy

If we consider the relationship between the triangle of man, nature, and God, we may say that the secular imagination of nature is its imagination of nature directly as a tool for its benefit. In my paper, I explain the secular ecological view that is summarized in Mario Bunge's statement. In his view, the technological process as human activity based on a kind of ecological view has usually been guided by five maxims that justify the unlimited exploitation of natural and social resources. He adds that today, all these principles have been rejected and largely modified. However, in the Islamic perspective of nature, this relationship is through God. God in the Islamic view is not only the creator of Nature but also, He is the owner and resource of everything in nature. This view is about everything in the ecological system of the world like men, animals, plants, and stones. I will analyze this ecological view from Quranic teachings. In this kind of ecological view, we have no right to do what we want in nature. Before every kind of intervention in the ecosystem, we must examine rulings, and due to those rulings, we can do our actions.

If we want to talk about the philosophy of religion with an Islamic approach, we must clarify what are its differences and similarities with the conventional philosophy of religion in the West. For this purpose, in this paper, the meaning of comparative philosophy and its obstacles, possibilities, necessities, and benefits will first be investigated. After that, it will be shown what considerations should be taken into account in order to have a comparative philosophy. Then, we will show how to have a philosophy of religion with an Islamic approach and what differences and similarities this type of philosophy of religion has with the Western philosophy of religion. Following that, some hermeneutic considerations for this philosophical comparison will be mentioned, and afterward, it will be shown how the Christian background of Western philosophy of religion has affected it. Finally, we will review some of the main subjects of the philosophy of religion if it is to be rationally evaluated with the foundations of Islamic thought to show what differences it has with the conventional Western philosophy of religion.

In this paper, it is shown that as people often convert their beliefs into knowledge through many external means, knowledge cannot be considered exclusive in a justified belief where its justification has been achieved internally. If we do not consider these people’s beliefs as knowledge, we will face some problems; not only will we be caught up in pervasive skepticism but we would also be rejecting the reality of most human items of knowledge. Therefore, to acquire our knowledge, we do not need to use internalism as externalism provides us with new facilities. Philosophy of religion may achieve new solutions through this expansion in epistemology. In this paper, four currents in the philosophy of religion that have used epistemological externalism are mentioned. It is also shown that religious epistemology, based on the trusted hearings which follow Greco’s path, provides a reliable way to justify religious beliefs. However, if we have a justification for religious beliefs through reassured hearings, all religions can claim that their followers believe in their own religious beliefs in this way; so they must be justified, and therefore, all religions must acquire true knowledge, and this is nothing but pluralism. But it seems that to explain the diversity of religions, we do not need to resort to religious pluralism. It can be said that beliefs based on trusted hearings do not rely on their confidence only in the religious preachings, but their confidence in the religious preachings that have been transferred correctly and also that the religious preachings which are based on trusted hearings depend on another preaching and each has been assured through its previous preaching. If some kind of mistrust occurs in this chain then the ultimate believer in the reliability of the narrated in this chain or their collection (in Greco’s particular view) cannot turn his belief into knowledge with the necessary justification. But the problem is what the end of the chain is based on. In some religions, a person can believe in the ability to understand many spiritualities and he has attempted to convey his findings to others. It is clear thatat the end of this chain, if it is the personal findings or readings of a person from spirituality, then the difference in spiritual reception among the early leaders can justify the diversity of religions. Therefore, this type of religious epistemology is dependent on the source of narrations. But some religions speak of believing in an existential truth and one of the consequences of believing in his existence will also be to achieve spirituality. They also believe that their early leaders have based their teachings on their confident hearings of that existential truth. In the meantime, Abrahamic religions believe in God as that existential truth. If a religion (such as Islam) can show the correctness of the chain of reassurance that leads to the prophet’s speech from God and also the prophet considers it not as his concept of spirituality but rather he has stated it because it is the same as the word sent by God, he can show the source of his teachings to be God. What we should ultimately be sure about in this type of epistemology is that he has been able to establish a relationship with God and has conveyed God’s words. In this paper, four paths are mentioned to achieve this assurance.

The mind prepares for questioning during fundamental transformation in the course of human life. The Coronavirus Crisis brought about a fundamental change in human life that had not happened in the world for decades. In order to deal philosophically with this crisis, new questions must be hunted down. In this paper, I enumerate some of these challenges. Some of emerging questions from those challenges is explained. It is shown that their analysis causes philosophical creativity and in the face of them we will find the success of philosophizing. Some of these challenges is discussed in the following field of philosophy: phenomenological questions about Corona, the new challenges in philosophy of science, political challenges, moral philosophy and norms in ethics, philosophy of religion, the growth of existentialistic attitudes to human beings, highlighting the issue of the meaning of life and the need for a philosophical answer, Corona Crisis and globalization.

The current Cyber-ethics in Western societies have been compiled based on secularist presupposition. This presupposition has different principles in comparison with the Islamic attitude which can lead one to take a different approach toward ethical problems. This paper is an attempt to propose principles of Islamic cyber-ethics upon which we can prepare answers for the problems of cyber-ethics, having evident characteristics of an Islamic approach that are distinguished from secularist answers. After a prefatory study on the background of the Islamic attitude to ethics, these characteristics will be propounded under four categories: fundamental and content components, spiritual components, legal components, and penal components. Under these categories, themes such as giving importance to agent goodness, the basic difference in one’s goal of living an ethical life, the relation of reason and revelation, and the basis for the legitimacy of the penal justice system will be discussed. Needless to say, this paper does not seek to prepare arguments for this model, and such arguments can be discussed in other philosophical investigations.

Philosophy in Islamic territory has different adventures. In this paper, at first, I examine contemporary trends in Islamic philosophy from rejection to liveliness. From a Western point of view, there is a supposition that Islamic philosophy is restricted to activities during middle ages, while it is not so for Iranian philosophical heritage. After a glance to Iranian-Islamic background, I will show the development of philosophy in Iran since then. Most feature of contemporary approach to philosophy is transcendent philosophy based on Mulla Sadra's views. I will enumerate some characteristics of his philosophy then I will point to the reception of Western philosophy in Iran and the contemporary activities in both Islamic and Western philosophy which has made Iran as a lively environment for philosophy.

Modernity’s attitude for new perspective on politics began with Thomas Hobbs and John Lock. Both of these philosophers had based their political views on some philosophical assumptions about mankind. They offered two opposite political disciplines because of their different philosophical anthropology based on their empirical philosophy. The role of peace in their account of natural state of man is in the core of their political thought. Lock introduced natural state of men in peace, therefore concluded a democratic government. Hobbs supposed that natural state of men is in war, therefore he thought about imperial government governed by a powerful dictator to bring peace and security. Although their views were as models for political discipline for a country, their philosophical foundation for their political suggestions can be considered as a basis for the study of world peace. In my paper I am going to examine their views for world peace and evaluate them for realizing world peace. Western modernity based on these two anthropological assumptions had its conclusions in the worst disaster in human history like fascism and Nazism. What has been wrong with modernity that results these problems with humanity? Postmodern thinkers have criticized modern attitude toward peace and security. However, I am going to study the dangers of some anthropological thought that will destroy real world peace in the name of spurious peace.

There has been an assumption that the Western attitude toward relation between religion and the state can be compatible with those approaches in Islamic territories. In this paper I am going to clarify some fundamental differences between Christianity as Western thinkers' account of religion and Islam in this respect. While Christianity is more ethical religion, Islam (like Judaism) has more attention to jurisprudence. While Christianity is more individual, Islam is more social. These differences and other cultural backgrounds in Islamic domain point to necessity of introducing some kinds of nonsecular models of relation between religion and the state. Based on those differences, I will point out to the reasons of need for some models of relation between religion and the state in Islamic domain. Then by referring to some characteristics of Islam I will try to show some specifications of successful models of relation between religion and the state in an Islamic political thought.