Kant considers pure aesthetic judgment to be disinterested and in the minute of quality and interest is a pleasure (delight) that results from the representation of the existence. In a footnote (§3), Kant declares that beauty is neither based on an interest nor establishes an interest. In explaining the concept of interest, Kant acts negatively and only by distinguishing between the agreeable and the good, depicting the DISINTERESTEDNESS of an aesthetic experience. In the first critique, Kant does not consider existence to be a real predicate; therefore, it is necessary to refer to his other works to find the clear and correct meaning of interest. By referring to moral works, we realize that interest is a kind of inclination towards something based on a rational rule. In this article, an attempt has been made to provide a clear concept of interest by considering the whole of Kant's aesthetic thought, to deal with the connection of interest with existence, and to answer the question of how interest is connected with the representation of existence.

DISINTERESTEDNESS in the aesthetics means that the aesthetic judgment should be free or pure of any interests including cognitive, moral, and beneficial satisfactions. In other words, the aesthetic judgments should be grounded in DISINTERESTEDNESS in the sense of not being based on my mental desire, what is good, and what is morally good for me. Although the issue had been coined in the philosophy of Kant and has been introduced as one of the innovations of his aesthetics, studying Avicenna's thoughts on pleasure and beauty reveals that he, also, emphasized the issue. He used the specific term of “ Mola'em” defining as agreeableness and pleasure. In his opinion, Mola'em is the perfection and goodness of perceptive faculty or special action of the faculty. He emphasized that pleasure was perceived solely by the Mola'em so other things like agreeable, what is good for the perceiver, and what is morally good do not interfere to obtain Mola'em or pleasure in the faculty. Since the perceiving of beauty is limited in obtaining Mola'em or perceiving pleasure, the concept of DISINTERESTEDNESS in his aesthetics is apprehensible. Kant discussed four particular unique features of aesthetic judgments and calls them ‘ moments. One of them is the DISINTERESTEDNESS in aesthetic judgments. So, his argument is more obvious and deeper than Avicenna's. Therefore, first, I present a comprehensive review of Avicenna’ s thoughts on beauty and his idea about DISINTERESTEDNESS in perceiving pleasure and beauty by the descriptive-analytical method. Then, I would compare it with the idea of Kant about the DISINTERESTEDNESS in aesthetics. The results show that the DISINTERESTEDNESS described by Avicenna and Kant is similar. So, we can claim that the concept that Kant has focused on, had already been noted by Avicenna.

DISINTERESTEDNESS is one of the main concepts in the aesthetics of the eighteenth century in Britain and Germany. In this research, the whatness of necessary and sufficient conditions for different aspects of this concept in its German branch is investigated. The purpose of recognizing different aspects of the concept of DISINTERESTEDNESS is to make a distinction between the aesthetic experience of others like empiric, epistemic, moral, and physical ones. The aesthetic experience seems to be different from the cognitive one, Such an idea is supported by Kant's view. Can it (autonomous aesthetic experience) be a continuous view in the thinking of Schopenhauer and Nietzsche? This study, with the comparative-analytic method, concludes that DISINTERESTEDNESS can be divided into theoretical, practical, and sensational divisions, and Kant, in the three divisions, provided the fundamental context for others. Theoretical DISINTERESTEDNESS in Kant is related to the concept of understanding, the cause and effect relation in the world and its teleological mechanism, the purposiveness of the form of the object. in the practical part, towards the teleological practice, in rapport to the morality and the good, in sensational part the personal intentions desires, purposes & interests toward objective determination lead to various aspects of DISINTERESTEDNESS. Schopenhauer took on the concept of DISINTERESTEDNESS from Kant and describes its aspects in his philosophical system, in a recent way different from Kant. The aesthetics of Schopenhauer lies in the heart of his metaphysics. He believed that the “ will” is the origin of the universe underlying ground of the world as representation. Schopenhauer took a delicate distance from Kant by emphasizing on subject of cognition with suspended Will, and also on the body. He distances from Kant by these accentuation. On the other hand, Schopenhauer's “ will” is similar to the Kant's “ thing-in-itself, but it is perceptible through Ideas which are mediation between the will and the tangible world. In order to understand ideas through ordinary objects, It should become a disinterested observer and ignore the individuality and personal will. it should be independent of any forms of space, time and causality through the suppression of the individual will. That means through the asceticism & aesthetic contemplation. Nietzsche challenged Kant's tenacious approach in the Birth of Tragedy with ignorance of objectivity and subjectivity. He relied on the two fundamental forces of nature, namely the Apollonian and the Dionysian which are active in art. With an accentuation on dionysian forces which is irreducible to two forces, Nietzsche believed that both qualities of two forces, in addition to DISINTERESTEDNESS and desires will drive art. Nietzsche` s concentration On the Genealogy of Morality is on physiology & physiology of art that required, some concepts like bodily states, sensuality and sexuality in order to enhance the life. So, art is an affirmation and apprehension of life with an emphasis on aesthetic experience. As a result, it seemed that Kant's approach in the definition of DISINTERESTEDNESS is stronge and radical. Schopenhauer's view is flexible and two-sided, and Nietzsche's approach especially in On the Genealogy of Morality is evaluated different or weak in comparison to Kant.

The concept of DISINTERESTEDNESS is one of the fundamental concepts in aesthetic experience which comes to mind in the name of Kant. Kant examined it at the first moment of his First Critique. Indeed, disinterested experience or in other words, DISINTERESTEDNESS is a unique character of aesthetic experience that makes it distinct from other experiences. Reviewing the thoughts of philosophers before Kant, it can be seen that this concept was even raised before Kant, but it has received little attention, then. In this regard, the following article is based on verifying the issue that how exactly the concept of DISINTERESTEDNESS is, and in what context it is discussed based on the thoughts of philosophers before Kant and what changes it have been undergone.

In the first moment of the analytic of the beautiful, in the first section of his book, Kant analyses judgment of taste (which he defines as judging something to be beautiful) concerning its quality. He writes: in order to call something beautiful, a human being must judge it as the object of impartial satisfaction or dissatisfaction. This "DISINTERESTEDNESS" or "impartiality" of the judgment of taste has attracted many scholars of Kant's aesthetics, on the one hand because of its importance for Kant's analysis and, on the other hand, because of its ambiguous character. One of the prominent figures who was attracted by this part of Kant's analysis is Theodor Adorno. In this paper, I have tried to get a closer look at the first section of Kant's third Critique, put forward the discussions which it gave rise to and finally answer some of the critiques. Also, I will investigate in more details Adorno's ideas on the "DISINTERESTEDNESS" of judgment of taste and the consequences of this approach to the concept of beauty and arts; I will argue that how Adorno-based on his philosophy in relation to art and the concept of beauty, and with the use of an dialectical way of thinking-gives us a new point of view to look at the subject and theorizes that. In the end, I will try to answer some of the critiques with regard to other sections of the third Critique in order to have a better understanding of Kant's position.

Boasting (Mofakhereh in Persian) as a poetic theme or as a sub-genre has a strong presence in the books of poems of classical Persian poets. Adopting an analytical approach, this research attempted at analyzing ‘, boasting’,in poems of Manouchehri Damghani, Sanaei Ghaznavi, and Khaghani Shervani based on Pierre Bourdieu’, s field theory. To do so, after extracting instances of their ‘, boasting’,odes and considering the historical and social issues of their times and their different habitus and mindsets, we tried to analyze the poems based on Bourdieu’, s four literary field principles (habitus, capital, struggle, and DISINTERESTEDNESS). The results showed that Manouchehri, due to his inclination to the power filed, and to make a name and a living and to stabilize his position, used his art and poetry for boasting. He did not observe the principle of DISINTERESTEDNESS in the literary field which attempts at purifying literature from personal intentions. As a result, he was pushed to the margin. But as the power field changed during the second Ghaznavid and Seljuk periods and some new problems and instabilities affected poets’,conditions, poets such as Sanaei and Khaghani distanced themselves from the power field, due to their specific habitus, and attempted at purifying literature and fighting the power field. From the two poets, Khaghani was more successful due to his DISINTERESTEDNESS and observance of the rules of the literary field.

Aesthetic experience is a rich and pleasing one. The factors that involve in this expe rience constitute the base of discourse between two schools of thought in contemporary aesthetics Integrationists, one of these two, believe that factors such as scientific knowledge and cultural conditions are combined with sensational qualities and make the aesthetic experience. The philosophers of the second school disagree with the integrationist position by emphasizing that the perception of beauty is dependant solely on the sensations of the observer (how it looks, sounds, or feels) and not knowing the history or cultural frame work of a scene or object. Perhaps the origins of these debates are in the form/content distinctions that formalism claims. This article, tries to describe the aesthetic experience and its difference with the cognitive experience in the light of some examples. At the end it would suggest that form/content conflict would lead to incoherence in aesthetic object and so it is rejected.

The development and complexity of different dimensions of science, has somehow made inevitably necessary what usually is called research collaboration among scholars and researchers. This collaboration is needed to answer the guestions regarding new issues and problems. Research Collaboration, coauthorship and coproduction have recently turned into the most important characteristics of the scientific society. The increasing complexity of current research requires a greater number of contributors for completion and the increasing trend toward multiple authorship being established. The resources and techniques that are needed to address research issues in some disciplines have increasingly fallen outside the command of individuals. Skilled researchers and frequent coauthors are among the most generous collaborators. Productivity and collaboration are correlated and those who are most productive are also most willing to share publication credits. The main purpose of this research is to find out the major rates of research collaboration and coauthorship among the Iranian scholars.

One of the main ambiguities in Khayyam's research record is the attribution or nonattribution of quatrains to this Neyshabourian philosopher. According to the opponents of attributing the quatrains to Khayyam, to equate their poet with Khayyam, a religious philosopher, is a community of contradictions and impossibilities. The result of such a belief is the claim of the existence of two Khayyams and the creation of a confrontation (rational philosopher and twentieth-century poet) between them. On the one side is a wise philosopher who is immersed in philosophical concepts for all of his life, and on the other side is a poet who has no desire except luxury. However, this confrontation does not resist Khayyam's works and the surviving reports about this poet. That is because not only can points about being in the House of Ishrat and referring to the DISINTERESTEDNESS of creation be observed in Khayyam's works and the reports of his contemporaries can contaminate the ideal image of the rationalist religious philosopher, but also there exists rationality in the content and structure of the quatrains that makes it impossible to attribute them to a bon vivant poet. The existence of these contradictions on both sides of the above-mentioned confrontation destroys this constructed confrontation from within and increases the possibility of attributing the quatrains to Khayyam by denying the fictitious poets.

The issue of the unity and difference of humans is rooted in the history of man’ s social life, and this is the basis for the emergence of divine prophets and the revelation of the heavenly books. With a brief overview of this issue, Verse 213 of chapter Bagherah explains the evolution of human thought in different stages. There are many ambiguities about the nature of the basis of unity, the causes of difference, the time of the expiration of the subject of the verse and the narration of the verse about the continuous tradition of the Most High God among the nations. Therefore, the verse has been the subject of dispute among scholars and commentators. Using the comparative – analytical method, this paper focuses on the presentation, examination, and critique of the various views of the Shite and Sunni commentators about the above ambiguities. The three views of unity on blasphemy, unity on monotheism and unity on rational principles and natural guidance with different approximations are the result of investigations concerning unity in the verse. The author confirms the third perspective with the approximation of "the unity of humans on the lack of religious guidance" at a particular time point, and argues that with the help of the principle of Jary and Tatbiq (applicability and comparing), the probability of DISINTERESTEDNESS from time is also significant in the interpretation of the verse.