نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی
نویسنده
نویسندۀ مسئول، دانشآموخته دکتری فلسفه و کلام اسلامی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
This research, using an analytical-critical method, examines and evaluates the effectiveness of Fayyaz Lahiji's defenses of the arguments for proving the existence of the researcher Khafri in confronting the criticisms of Sadr al-Mutalahin. The present study focuses on a comparative analysis of Lahiji's interpretations - including his conceptual distinctions in the field of essential priority, time, and the rule of "possible as possible" - with Mulla Sadra's fundamental criticisms. The results show that Lahiji has strengthened the foundation of Khafri's argument by providing a systematic reconstruction. However, according to the studies conducted, his defenses have shortcomings in some cases, especially in the distinction between existence as a existent and existence as an attribute, compared to Mulla Sadra's responses. The conclusion is that Lahiji's contribution is a methodical attempt at fundamental reconstruction, but the key contribution and distinction of this study lies in providing a rigorous and documented critical assessment of the adequacy of these defenses against Sadr al-Muttalahin's final critique, which highlights these limitations in the evolution of the existential argument.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)