Vico's Critique of Cartesian Thought as one of the most important beginings of the emergence of historical thinking

As a pioneer of historical thinkers, Vico laid out the origins of his historical thought in his critique of Cartesian mathematicalism. Descartes' effort, is not to attain the truth, but to attain certainty with the criterion of clarity and distinction. He sought to make all the sciences sure in this way. On the base of this point of view, all humanities, including history are excluded from the sphere of sciences, which means forgetting much heritage of the past. Vico considers Descartes’ unhistorical and static understanding of human nature as the most important philosophical problem of French philosopher. For Vico the nature of man and consequently his thinking and Reason have transformed throughout the history. Vico justifies this transformation in different periods of history with corresponding forms of reasoning. On the base of his epistemological rule, namely “the real is constructive”, Vico conceives making something as the condition of knowing it. Therefore, he believes that history and all human achievements, are man-made and intrinsically constructed and hence are recognizable through empathetic insight and the power of imagination. Vico believes that the outcome of Cartesian philosophy is nothing other than human being’s disconnection from history and society. For Vico, the true knowledge of everything is knowledge through its causes or, in other words, historical knowledge about it. Although Vico considers history as the result of man-made activites, he conceives divine providence as the leader and guide of history. In Vico's view, understanding history in any given period is possible through a proper understanding of the intellectual framework and principles governing that period

From the Idea of God in Classical Metaphysics to Nietzsche's Alternative Design

Nietzsche believed that metaphysicians considered their beliefs to be true and gave their ideas an objective truth. Nietzsche claims that all human values and beliefs, including belief in God, arose from the perspective of the desire for power and in order to preserve and preserve human life and usefulness; Without being able to give an objective existence to these ideas. This is exactly where Nietzsche finds the Western metaphysics vulnerable, because the followers of this knowledge considered the personal truth according to their own interpretation, thus removing the role of preserving life from the attributes of God and turning it against themselves. . Nietzsche, on the other hand, analyzed the pragmatist basis of the idea of God and reconstructed it in the next step. This article tries to show the philosopher's plan for God by analyzing the history of metaphysics in Nietzsche's thought and its relation to the classical idea of God, as well as trying to design another human being in the world to come

Fizikalism and Existentialism

This article is about the dispute between existentialism and physicalism concerning the in/authenticity of the human being's thought and freedom. It deals with the impossibility of reducing human thought, practice, choice, and decision to their physical, biological, brain-based or neurological aspects. In other words, the way of thinking which can be called naturalism, materialism, or physicalism based on different criteria (from seventeenth-century until twentieth century) tries to interpret human existence (“soul” in the mythological language of Plato, “transcendental imagination” in Kant’s philosophy, “existence” in Kierkegaard’s thought and existentialism and “Dasein” in Heidegger’s view) as a product of physical, natural or material processes and does not regard human freedom of choice as authentic (or irreducible) but as a secondary product of biological natural phenomena. This article claims that the main matter of the dispute is not specifically determined in the debate between physicalism or reductionism on the one hand and the philosophers believing in existence or Dasein on the other hand. This vagueness has caused the discussion about the theoretical challenge not to undergo a smooth path. In order to make clear the exact parameters of the central matter of dispute, I try to challenge the fundamentals of physicalism