Arezu Zarezadeh; Babak Abbasi; Alireza Darabi
Abstract
The key to understanding Wittgenstein's late philosophy is to pay attention to grammatical research. This concept of grammar is different from the traditional usage and does not care about language because it is a system of signs. With this approach, the nature of religious propositions finds a special ...
Read More
The key to understanding Wittgenstein's late philosophy is to pay attention to grammatical research. This concept of grammar is different from the traditional usage and does not care about language because it is a system of signs. With this approach, the nature of religious propositions finds a special feature that is different from other epistemological categories. From Wittgenstein's point of view, propositions are divided into two categories, "intersubstitutable " and " not intersubstitutable", which religious propositions are not intersubstitutable; therefore, they cannot be explained or interpreted in other sentences. Also, the nature of the language of religion is "internal" and finds meaning only in itself and, they are not such as "external" propositions that find a clearer meaning with the other propositions. Thus, religious propositions are disconnected from other propositions, such as scientific propositions. Although religious categories are used significantly in the field of religion, they are beyond reality or truthfulness and falsity. By the importance of the language of religion in understanding religious issues, this article, by descriptive-analytical method answers two main questions: What is the cognitive or non-cognitive status of the language of religion from Wittgenstein's point of view? From Tabatabai's point of view, what are the criticisms of this view? Accordingly, after examining the characteristics of the language of religion from Wittgenstein's point of view, its consequences are discussed with Tabatabai's views.
Mohsen Jamalimehr; Babak Abbasi; Reza Naderloo
Abstract
It seems that philosophical debates around the problem of levels of natural selection which lead to propose group and multi level selection theories cause more efforts of evolutionary theory application in other knowledge domains such as anthropology. In this way Wilson’s efforts for explaining ...
Read More
It seems that philosophical debates around the problem of levels of natural selection which lead to propose group and multi level selection theories cause more efforts of evolutionary theory application in other knowledge domains such as anthropology. In this way Wilson’s efforts for explaining an adaptation role of religion in light of organismic theory of society is one of the recent and most debatable. On basis of organismic concept of religious groups and evolutionary group selection theory, he tries to explain religiosity trait as an adaptation. Although he tries to explain by giving some evidences from history of religion and religious groups’ behavior but not only there are some form and content critiques to application of evolutionary theory in other knowledge domains but also some serious rival theories offered.
