"The Refutation of Idealism" (1903) is considered by some historians of philosophy as starting- point of analytic philosophy. In this paper, Moore argued that there is a crucial premise that is essential to all possible arguments for the idealistic conclusion that "All reality is mental (spiritual)". This premise is: "To be is to be perceived" (in the broad sense of 'perceive'). Moore argued that, under every possible interpretation of it, that pemise is either a tautology or false; hence no significant conclusion can ever be inferred from it. As a result of Moore argument, idealism was replaced with realism in contemporary western philosophy.

Since 17th century, western philosophy experienced a basic change in philosophical research and discussing the formation of knowledge and its validity became the most important problem in philosophy. This change, however, was reflected in Islamic philosophy three century later, because there was no relation between these two worlds of philosophy. As a great expert in Islamic philosophy, Motahhari attempted at first to be informed of the ideas of the modern and contemporary philosophers and afterwards to review them. One of these ideas on which he was concerned, was the problem of knowledge. There are two counter views on perception and its representation. The first one is realism which affirms the existence of physical things as the objects of perception and thinks that the external world is represented in the perceptions. The other one is subjective idealism which denies this matter. In their The Principles of Philosophy and the Method of Realism, Tabatabaei and Motahhari by reliance on the realistic foundations of Islamic philosophy, criticize subjective idealism on the one hand and dialectic materialism on the other. Motahheri's view in this book which has been written in 1330s H. differs from his view in his Detailed Account of Manzoumeh which has been written in 1350s H. In the former book he regards idealism as equal to sophism and thinks of the idealist philosophers like Berkeley and Schopenhauer as equal to the sophists like Protagoras and Gorgias, because they all deny the external world, but in the later he presents some deeper analysis of the theory of knowledge and proving the existence of external world. In this paper Motahheri's views on epistemology and his critics against idealism will be discussed and reviewed.

Modarres Razavi in Hadiqat al Haqiqa annotations, under "Drunken Camel in the Desert" anecdote has noted that from his viewpoint Sanai’ s statements about “ camel” reveal his mistranslation or misunderstanding of the anecdote’ s original source, i. e. Ibn-al-Muqaffa's Kalī lah and Dimnah. In the original anecdote in Mahabharata and Kalī lah and Dimnah, this word has been recorded as “ ifil” . Hence, it is probable that Sanai has mistakenly translated this word as “ underage camel” . However, what can be realized from animal semiology in Sanai's thoughts is that he has selected “ camel” symbol deliberately and consciously. On this basis, in this paper we propose four duly-substantiated reasons for “ Sanai's deliberate selection” hypothesis taking into consideration Sanai’ s dream interpretation in Hadiqa; the national symbolic tradition used in narrating Esfandiar expedition to Zabulistan, the climatic and geographical evidence in Hadiqa anecdotes, and the allegorical narrative of "the Affair of the Elephant" in Sanai’ s Hadiqa.

Sufism and Sufism have a special place in the history of post-Islamic Iran. The way people and rulers deal with this category has not been the same throughout the history of Iran. Sufism and the Sufis related to it have been faced with popular favor and the sympathy of the rulers in a period based on social and political conditions, and at times it has been pursued and determined, and it has been criticized and rejected from an intellectual point of view.This issue was one of the tense issues during the Safavid period. The conflict between the views of Sufis and the jurists reached its peak in this period. Fighting against Sufism and Sufism and preventing the distortion of Shi'ism was always one of the most important concerns of the scholars of the Safavid era. One of the ways of this struggle was to write rebuttalsBased on this, the religious scholars decided to expose the invalidity of Sufis' beliefs and teachings by writing a Refutation of Sufism and prevent them from distorting the religion.Of course, dealing with Sufis was not only theoretical, but also practical measures were taken which played an effective and significant role in informing people and society about the deviations of Sufiism and rejection of Sufis. It also motivated the Safavid government to fight deviations and heresies. This article tries to express the effects of these Refutations on the people and society of the Safavid era.

This article considers the approach of Imam Al-Sadiq in answering the theological questions and objections. The traditions (al-Ahadith) in which the way of Imam Sadiq has been narrated, show that when he debates with followers of different Islamic denominations or with disbelievers, makes use the arguments.Therefore, the main result of the research in the traditions is that Imam Sadiq usually uses one of many kinds of arguments to reject objections. The author proves this claim by narrating traditions in regard with the approach of Imam Sadiq who has set forth six kinds of proofs: first principles, observables, empirical facts, the principles of testimony, conjectures and innate ideas.

The contradictory and multidimensional relationship between Shi’ ism, Sufism and monarchy in the Safavid period has led to the formation of particular discourses, propositions and discursive actions in that era. This relationship has been formed around the quest for socio-political legitimacy with the aim of stabilizing a desirable discursive order. The religious Refutations by the Sufis and Shia clergy could be considered as political and ideological media aimed at challenging the political and social legitimacy of the rival discourse. In this paper, we attempt to investigate the way Persian Refutations encountered Sufism during Safavid era with discourses about Sufism. This analysis is done at two textual and meta-textual levels. In textual analysis, using critical linguistic tools, we sought to identify the persuasive techniques and argumentative propositions deployed for confronting Sufism, and in meta-textual analysis we attempted to investigate the historical structures which affected the authors' approach and the relationship of the texts with effective historical mechanisms. From this perspective, it seems that the authors of Refutations attempted to alienate the discourses of Sufism and reproduce the ideological distance between Sufism and Shi’ ism by deploying certain strategies such as defaming the elites' reputation and decontextualizing the teachings of Sufism. The major discursive proposition of these treatises is the denial of any historical and epistemological relationship between Sufism and Shi’ ism. The moderate approach of some elites of that era in criticizing Sufism can also be considered an attempt to stabilize the desired discursive order by dividing Sufism into two positive and negative poles.