Gadamer's hermeneutics strategy motifs influenced by Greek philosophy, particularly Platonic dialogues and conversations. But while Plato believes the Truth can be achieved through of the dialectic method according to Gadamer Truth Despite achieved through of the dialectic can not be achieved through method. In this article we will try to by Gadamer's hermeneutics to pay be affected through from Plato and He shared the points and differences with Plato.

According to the Platonist a mathematical object, such as a number or a set, is an abstract object. These objects are thought to be non-physical, non-mental and acausal. Mathematical PLATONISM is the view that there exist such objects and that our theories describe them. What I am going to say in this paper is that at the moment, there is no decisive argument for or against mathematical PLATONISM. I go through the main arguments of Frege, Godel and Quine in favour of PLATONISM and try to refute it by E. P. R. thought experiment. At this stage, I advance the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum phenomena to support my argument. By discussing Hilbert's formalism and Field's factionalism, I then continue to show how the views of anti-Platonists could be advocated. I conclude that there is no fact of the matter as to whether there are abstract objects or there are not.

Despite the often false impression that the analytic philosophy as an anti-metaphysical movement has nothing to do with metaphysics, there can be found good reasons to grant the metaphysical dispositions of analytic philosophers, and thereby, to minimize the anti-metaphysical nature of analytic philosophy in its all phases. Since analytic philosophy is a historical movement the main nature of which developed through several stages, the very kinds of metaphysical dispositions within each one of its various stages can be easily portrayed. In the meantime, logical realism as the early stage of analytic philosophy contains plenty of metaphysical dispositions. Undoubtedly, one cannot say that analytic philosophy in this period was not committed to metaphysical theses about the plurality of entities, the ultimate nature of reality and the logical structure of the world. In this paper, then, after giving a relatively complete explanation of the logical realism, we claimed that although logical realists rejected the traditional speculative metaphysics of their predecessors, they also replaced it by the metaphysics of logic that pursues the metaphysical aims, this time, by logical means. So, we portrayed this kind of metaphysics as Bolzano’s SEMANTIC PLATONISM, Frege’s and Russell’s Pluralistic PLATONISM, Russell’s Pluralistic Atomism, and Wittgenstein’s logical atomism.

In this essay, we seek to make a comparative overview of the Platonic Form with the main idea of Gottlob Frege in the creation of the Third Realm and to attribute the presence and existence of certain beings, especially thought, to that world. This is, of course, the first study to be carried out, and the main idea is to explore Frege’ s PLATONISM (meaning its term in contemporary philosophy) in analytic philosophy. Accordingly, the author first examines Plato's original idea of the creation of the universe as well as exemplary beings, then explains Frege's use of the idea and tries to match it. Then, by examining Frege's views on the Third Realm and the creatures present in it, especially thought, we attempt to determine whether a one-to-one correspondence can be established between the two. With the objections and criticisms that the author makes of describing the Frege system in the creation of the Third realm and thought, in the end he claims that the one-to-one correspondence between them cannot be raised. What has been examined as the end result is Frege's overall system and system in PLATONISM.

Some mathematical philosophers believe that we can achieve a new and better version of mathematical PLATONISM, by eliminating defects of original PLATONISM. According to Brown's version of PLATONISM, that here we call it “ Modern PLATONISM” , the nature of mathematics can be formulated in these seven theses: realism, abstraction, particularity, Intuitiveness, priority, fallibility, and extensibility. This paper criticizes and evaluates the New PLATONISM, according to two major criteria: the social acceptability, and the methodological acceptability. The social acceptability of a theory, according to my definition, is the interest and attitude of the people to that theory; and it can be measured on the frequency or percentage of interested parties. But the methodological acceptance of a theory means to match it with criteria such as consistency, simplicity and explanatory power; and its value can be assessed based on its success in solving philosophical problems related to it. According to Brown, the new PLATONISM, is the best philosophical theory about the nature of mathematics, both sociological and methodological. As for sociological criteria, we can be sympathetic and agree with Brown. That is, it seems that the new version of PLATONISM is still acceptable. But it needs to prove its methodological acceptability. Because the access problem and the certainty problem are still not resolved.

Gnosticism is one of the most important and influential religious-mystical schools of thought in pre-and post-Christian centuries, which considers salvation on the basis of the divine wisdom, containing some of the deepest epistemological and philosophical ideas of that period in theology, cosmology, anthropology and eschatology. It refers to a number of ancient schools of thought, which has widely spread in Western Asia as a theological and mysteical discipline, under the influence of Hellenism or Greco-Hellenic, Hermetic, Platonic and Middle Platonic schools, as well as religions such as Judaism, Christianity and Zoroasterianism. Because of the widespread exchange of ideas and concepts, these religions and schools of thought had mutual influences on each other and displayed various common features in their beliefs. This paper examines the essence and origins of Gnostic worldview by assessing the main principles and foundations of the Hermetic, Platonic and Middle Platonic ideologies in various topics such as divinity,existential dualism,fate of the world,man and his relation to God,and descent along with return of the spirit, in order to uncover the similarities and differences of these systems of thought.

Absolute Creationism or Modified PLATONISM is the answer to the challenge that PLATONISM poses to theism. The main concern of this view is the reconcile between Classical theism and PLATONISM. Absolute creationism, in fact, claims that necessary truths, like possible beings, depend on God. Thus, in the ontological inventory we do not faced a being who exists independently of God, and God is the only independent being. Thus the claim of contemporary Platonists, who argue that some abstract objects, such as necessary truths, necessarily exist, is eternal and uncreated, provided that these truths, while necessary and eternal, are created and dependent on God is accepted. William Craig, the contemporary American theist philosopher, believes that this view faces a number of problems, such as conflate of conceptualism, the Vicious Circularity (Bootstrapping objection), incoherence with free will of God, the traditional theory of creation and traded biblical doctrine of creation with emanationism. Although some of Craig's objections are not to the view of absolute Creationism; But absolute Creationism faces serious problems, and it seems that it is possible to defend the Cartesian view of Universal Possibilism. This paper explains and examines Absolute Creationism and Craig's criticisms

This paper would attempt to illustrate some possible links between Deleuze's way of thinking and the practice of modern and post-modern artists. This analogy is defined and explained in the context of Deleuze's anti-PLATONISM to see if there is a relation between Deleuze's struggle to oppose anti-PLATONISM, his desire to create a new way of thinking, and what modern artists actually did in their practice. Hence, after defining some of the concepts and showing the importance and function of them in modern art, the paper would try to trace the same concepts in Deleuze's thought. It will then explain Deleuze's anti-PLATONISM putting emphasis on the concept of simulacrum; meanwhile, it will briefly answer Badiou's critique of Deleuze's anti-PLATONISM. Finally, it would show that Deleuze, relying on this opposition, and in fact inspired by intellectual processes used by post-modern artists, is trying to find a third way for thinking to a world full of images. He introduces a path that neither goes back and nor, as we find with Baudrillard, sees the world as an apocalyptic world of images in which we wander.

Foucault pays attention to the concept of representation and its effect on the search for truth. The emphasis of the present article is on Foucault's "This is not a Pipe," which he later expanded slightly and published as an independent book. Foucault's research approach in the seventies and his writings in this decade are influenced by Deleuze. In an article entitled "The Theater of Philosophy", Foucault reviews Deleuze's thoughts in his two books, namely Difference and Repetition, and Logic of Sense. Although Deleuze devoted an independent book to Foucault's ideas, it can be argued that Foucault was influenced by Deleuze's ideas and his anti-Platonic views in the 1970s. For him, the distinguishing feature of a philosophy is not its anti-Platonic character; what distinguishes one philosophy from other philosophies is, for Foucault, the same distinction that distinguishes an illusion from another. This idea that a philosopher can take the spears of other philosophers and throw them in paths that may have never been intended by those philosophers themselves is not unique to Deleuze. Foucault himself devoted much of his philosophical thought to the theoretical and systematic development of a philosophy rooted in Heidegger's thought and by way of him in Kant's philosophy. Thinking needs a driving force, an impetus that motivates it to start and set foot on the path of thinking. But for Heidegger, the fact that we are not thinking yet means that we are captive in the conventional, representational framework of thought. Representational forms of thinking that combine mental thinking with representational forms cannot provide an appropriate answer to the question of "what thinking is". Representation does not provide us with the real quality of thinking. For Heidegger, therefore, thinking relates to something outside the realm of representation and is in stark contrast to representational forms inherited from the past. Foucault's attempt in most of his writings is, in a sense, to think informally. For him, thinking in this way is related to the "outside", that is to the unconventional and non-representational aspect of thinking. According to Lawler, for Foucault to think means to think differently. In his confrontation with the moral-representational aspect of "truth," Nietzsche tried to show how truth, which he presented as if it was only understood in a Platonic sense, became a myth. In his famous essay “On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense" he argues how the distinction between the sensible world and the supersensible world led to the formation of the myth of the existence of truth in another world. Nietzsche relates this distinction to reason, our understanding of knowledge, and believes that reason has led to many exaggerations for man. Nietzsche's understanding of this kind of truth was directly related to Plato's specific understanding of truth. Heidegger was also aware of this distinction in his book Nietzsche. In this book, and in his discussion of the will to power as art, he tries to show what overthrowing of PLATONISM probably imply in Nietzsche. Nietzsche himself, who had previously condemned Kant for failing to overthrow PLATONISM, is now accused by Heidegger of doing the same. For Heidegger, too, the relation of truth to art is important: the truth of the sensible world. Art, as mentioned in Plato's dialogues, is concerned with appearances and the sensible world, and gives way to sensual affairs. Heidegger values Nietzsche's understanding of reversing the conventional understanding of truth, as well as his desire to pay attention to art in search of a new truth, but he also tries to show where the danger of Nietzsche's approach ultimately lies. This line of thought is ultimately handed down to Foucault who following Heidegger's intellectual project seeks to overturn PLATONISM. For Heidegger, Nietzsche's intellectual endeavors in his final years were thought-provoking pint toward the first sparks of truly creative and progressive philosophical thinking. It seems that madness prevents Nietzsche from continuing to work. This short period of thought, which Heidegger believes is also the most brilliant and creative period, indicates the way forward. Yet, it remained for the philosophers to see how the real world became a myth and what happened to the truth? From that point on, now it is necessary for Foucault to examine the history of thought in the West and show what happened that the perceptible matters took precedence, and what happened after that precedence was questioned in the works of artists like Magritte and how finally truth became more and more descending or non-relevant. If Nietzsche throws away both worlds, then he inevitably will have to deny the world of sensations, and his way of thinking will undoubtedly lead to nihilism. But it is unlikely that Nietzsche sought nihilism, and of course he devoted much of his mental energy to denying nihilism. So, we need to see why denying the sensible world. If the denial of the supersensible world occurred for anti-Platonic reasons, it would no longer be necessary to deny the sensible world. Foucault sees this as context for a change: the understanding of the perceptible world changes, and a new human being emerges, a human being freed from the trap of PLATONISM, who has developed such an understanding as seen in Magritte's paintings. But if PLATONISM is overthrown, as Nietzsche claims, what would happen will be the priority of sensible world over supersensible, which leads to the affirmation of the sensible world. Foucault doesn't seek such an opposition but understood in its contrast to the supersensible world. A new order must be established that rises from the "middle" and not from the top or bottom. One should not be valued and the other should not be despised. As long as this hierarchy is observed, we will be remained, or worse trapped, in the bondage of PLATONISM. The main issue in this article is the relationship between Foucault's thought and his philosophical Anti-PLATONISM. Under this pretext, his analysis of Magritte's work is his article "This is not a pipe" would be examined and its relation to the concept of "outside" in his thought of this period would be analyzed. The question of the present study is the relationship between the concept of "outside" and Foucault's anti-Platonic views in his analysis of Magritte's paintings. Research Method in this article is descriptive-analytical through which we examine four works by Magritte to understand the bearings of Foucault's anti-Platonic attitude. The method of data collection is by studying the existing library resources on Foucault. The method of research, is related to the genealogy of his attitude as well as the methodological reasons for his opposition to Platonic thought in his early period of thought; meanwhile, the relationship between word and image would be argued as well. This relationship would be put in the context of Magritte's works and the analysis of his works would also be included. The results indicate that Foucault's anti-Platonic analysis of Magritte's works is an attempt to overthrow the Platonic structure of thought, and this was probably one of the reasons that he succeeded in creating new method of thinking in the philosophical and social fields.