194 research outputs found
Reducible contributions to quantum electrodynamics in external fields
No full text© 2019, The Author(s). We consider one-particle reducible (1PR) contributions to QED and scalar QED processes in external fields, at one-loop and two-loop order. We investigate three cases in detail: constant crossed fields, constant magnetic fields, and plane waves. We find that 1PR tadpole contributions in plane waves and constant crossed fields are non-zero, but contribute only divergences to be renormalised away. In constant magnetic fields, on the other hand, tadpole contributions give physical corrections to processes at one loop and beyond. Our calculations are exact in the external fields and we give strong and weak field expansions in the magnetic cas
A Hypothesis about the Author of Aja’ib al-Dunya
No full textAja’ib al-Dunya is one of the most famous Books of Wonders in Persian which has had a great impact on later works. Some scholars reject the attribution of this book to Abol-moayyed Balkhi, but identifying the author is a question that has so far remained unanswered. In the book Aja’ib Va Ghara’ib, Azari Esfarayeni referred to this book 14 times. In one of them, he attributed the book to Naser Khosrow. In this research, the author seeks to verify the accuracy of this attribution. The study demonstrates that the quotations made by Azari are available in the mentioned sources, and we can trust his honesty. Comparing those 14 stories shows that Azari used the same Aja’ib al-Dunya which is now available. Additionally, the examination of biographies and Naser Khosrow's works shows that he was probably interested in this branch of knowledge in an episode of his life. Therefore, it can be concluded that Azari Esfrayeni's statement is probably true and the book Aja’ib al-Dunya may have been composed by Naser Khosrow before converting to the Isma’ili thought and being entitled “Hojjat of Khorasan Island”
Ironic remarks in Divan of Naser Khosrow and works of schlegel brothers
No full text1.Introduction Iran and Germany are two countries with fruitful history and traditions in literature and philosophy, but there are not enough works in the field of comparative study between the works of their thinkers and poets. In this study, some works of Naser Khosrow (394-481 A.H) and the Schlegel brothers Friedrich Schlegel (1772-1829 A.D) and A.W Schlegel (1767-1845 A.D) as some representatives of these two countries are studied in an especial field: Irony. This research intends to show how they use this figure of speech in their works and also compare their uses. Irony is a satirical figure of speech which Naser Khosrow and The Schlegel brothers liked and used. There is a variety of definitions for irony. This figure of speech shows the paradoxical aspects of the things: Paradoxes between the world of matter and the world of mind, between the world of word and the world of act or etc. A thinker may build an ideal world in his mind therefore he would see some defects in the real world, so he can use the ironic expression to show those defects. The comparative study of the works of Naser Khosrow and The Schlegel brothers shows why and how they use irony, and how their worldviews affect their use of irony. 2.Methodology This research is descriptive, analytic and comparative and the data were collected thorough a library study by taking notes. First, various definitions of irony were collected thorough the creditable sources. Second, the ironic remarks of Naser Khosrow and the Schlegel brothers were extracted from these books: Fragmets of Friedrich Schlegel, A course of lectures on dramatic art and literature of A.w Schlegel, Divane Ash'ar and Vaj'he deen of Naser khosrow. Third the extracted data were classified and analyzed based on the laws of comparative study of literature. 3.Discussion What is Irony? Irony which is a humorous and indirect expression is used by an author attempting to show up two or more aspects of an object or a thought. Friedrich Schlegel said our world is paradoxical and only irony can show its paradox. This figure of speech should introduce a mixture of pain and laugh. In fact an ironist hides his or her grief behind a happy word and when the readers or audiences recognize that the author's goal was opposite of what he or she said, experiences a disdainful defeat. By using irony we say something and mean something else which is opposite of it. It seems that Naser Khosrow is a serious and starchy poet, often disdaining his opposites who love the material world. But there is also a kind of paradox in his poem. He beautifully describes the beauties of the nature and suddenly says that is not important to love the nature, and everybody who loves these things is a donkey! But why? Because according to his belief, paying attention to the material world can get the man away from the spiritual world. Human is human but lives as a donkey because he sees the World like an animal, and it is an ironic situation! Naser Khosrow criticizes the manner of some clergymen. He says they are men of religion but sometimes, some of them give the orders against the religion. One can get some orders from one clergyman and some from another one and up to these, there is no especial religious order, and this is an irony. He as a follower of religion of Esma'eeli, says that we should interpret the orders of our religion because they have meanings which we must know. And we must also know the soul of them. He believes that there is a distance and then a difference between the word and the meaning, such a paradox can be a basis to see the World ironic. Romanticism was born in eighteenth century and the romanticists said that Determinism could not explain and interpret the World. Romanticism was against the Determinism because it saw the World as a mechanical system based on mathematical laws. The romanticist said that the World has a soul and they wanted to know and express it by art, wit and irony. Friedrich Schlegel as a member of new movement used irony so much. A.W Schlegel sees the irony as a balance between the reality and the fantasy in Drama. The philosophical irony is a common point of view in the poems of Naser Khosrow and the fragments of Friedrich Schlegel, because they use irony to a confession: disability of the understanding the truth! This introduces a painful laugh, so they don't use this figure of speech to say banal things. Friedrich Schlegel once said Philosophy is the real place of irony. Our world is paradoxical but how can we go out of this paradoxical situation? Friedrich Schlegel says that irony shows the essential paradoxes in the nature of the World. We cannot explain the truth but we must do this! We should simultaneously be aware of the impossibility and the necessity of the expressing the truth: the World has an unlimited anarchy and the way which we should go to get out of this situation is the awareness. But the way of Naser Khosrow is different. He believes in his religion and says only animals don't believe in the religion. He wants to stay away from the essential anarchy of the nature of the World by accepting the unlimited power of God which is represented in religion. Poetry is an appropriate atmosphere for irony, because it is not necessary for poet to be rational. Poem is based on imagination and fantasy, and it means that poetry does not need the laws like mathematics, so paradoxes can be putting in the same place. Poet can mix wit, thought and feeling. Naser Khosrow could do this mixture well. He brought in a poem the philosophical ideas with the literary beauties. Through this, he could use feeling and thought without leaving any of them. Thus he could introduce his ironies in the poetic texture. Friedrich Schlegel admitted that the irony can be the base of a new aesthetic by which we can mix the philosophy and the poem. Nevertheless he used the Fragment, because he wanted to use the facilities of both of them: poem and prose. Socratic irony is a kind of irony based on the question. In Fragments we see many Socratic ironies because the Schlegel brothers like the style of Socrates in philosophical irony. Naser Khosrow also used this method to represent the paradoxes in the thought of his opponents. A point that we must emphasize it, is that these thinkers had an ideal world in their minds and compared the things of the real world with it, so they saw some paradoxes, and chose ironic expression to show the paradoxes which they saw. 4.Conclusion Man wants to know the secrets of the existence but he cannot do it, because of the limitation of the human's mind: so a point of view based on the doubt and protestation is introduced. This is the basis of irony, when this point of view is mixed with a satirical expression, irony is born. Irony can be used to show the paradoxes between the word and the practice or between what really exists and what is acclaimed exist. This figure of speech can be also used as an arm against the opponents, as Naser Khosrow and The Schlegel brothers do so. They show the paradoxical aspects of the thinks of their opponents and say that the think of their opponents is paradoxical and so is satirical and ironic. In this ground the ideas of Naser Khosrow and the Schlegel brothers about irony are similar but there is an important difference between them. Naser Khosrow is a follower of Esma'eeli religion and the Schlegel brothers are two founders of the Romanticism. The think of Naser Khosrow is in the circle of religion so his worldview is religious therefore his ironies are in this field. The Schlegel brothers are romanticists and see the World through the window of art, criticism and philosophy so their ironies are in the field of art, criticism and Philosophy. Keywords :Divan of Naser Khosrow, Schlegel brothers, Comparative research, Irony, satirical
Changes in Plasma Level of oxidative Stress, hs-CRP and Anti-Hsp27 Titers in Stroke patients
No full textThe Relationship between State and Ethics in the Doctrine of Professor Naser Katouzian
No full textRelations between state and ethics or religion is one of the important subjects in political philosophy and public law and there are several approaches about it. In this meantime, Professor Naser Katouzian refers to three kind of Relations between state and ethics or religion and points out the theory of stipulated state to ethics, state that is beside of ethics or religion and the governor state on ethics or religion. This paper has considered the doctrine of professor and with utilization from other sources in public and constitutional law, has completed this issue .The author has considered the concepts of perfectionist and neutral state as related concepts to stipulated state to ethics, state that is beside of ethics or religion and with conceptual analysis about them, has remarked the necessity of obstruction the line from perfectionism to despotism.Naser Katouzian is undoubtedly one of the most influential figures of Iranian law in the contemporary era. An unforgettable and moral teacher whose works and school of thought every professor and student of law in Iran is indebted to and rereading his doctrine can be considered a solution to most legal problems of the society. Despite the professor's specialized entry into private and civil law and dedicating the major part of his works to this field, his concern about the relationship between the state and the nation and public law had him write in this important field and take part in preparing the draft of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and setting up the foundations of Iran’s political-legal system.In this article, the author has turned to one of the important views of Professor Naser Katouzian regarding the relationship between the government, ethics, and religion and tries to evaluate the professor's doctrine in this field as much as possible. Reexamining this point of view was not only necessary at the beginning of the Islamic revolution, but also nowadays. It can be very effective in explaining the foundations of the Islamic Republic of Iran's constitution and governing political system. Therefore, the main Point of this research is the relationship between state, ethics, and religion in the thinking of Professor Naser Katouzian and formats and forms in which this relationship will appear.In analyzing the relationship between the state, ethics, and religion and in a basic classification, Katouzian points to the state that is bounded to ethics and religion, the state that is beside ethics and religion and is neutral, and the state that rules on ethics and religion. The professor considered religious governments, such as Islamic or Christian governments, as examples of the states that are bounded to a certain religion and considers the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and some of its fundamental principles, such as Article IV, as the pledge that has bounded the state to a certain religion and ethics.In the second category, he refers to the governments that are beside ethics and religion and are neutral. In these states, the government is separated from any common philosophical and religious beliefs among the people and ethics, and religion has a personal and private feature next to the government and is ineffective in policymaking and legislation.In the third category, professor Katouzian points to the states that rule on ethics and religion in which the government takes an authoritarian approach. The government has the authority to validate and create rights, good, and even morality and it is under the government’s will that the moral progress and evolution of citizens is pursued.This paper considers the doctrine of Professor Katouzian and by looking at other sources in public and constitutional law, has developed this issue. The author has considered the concepts of perfectionist and neutral states as related concepts to states that are bound to ethics and states that are beside ethics or religion and by conceptual analysis of them has remarked the necessity of preventing the progression of perfectionism to despotism. Professor Katouzian's concern about the pure sovereignty of the government over the right and good is commendable in the author’s view. This research intends to talk about the limitations and restraints of the government's power and its lack of sovereignty over the rights and morals with reference to the professor's doctrine.Professor Katouzian criticizes authoritarian governments that rule on ethics and religion and in practice, examples of these outlooks in government such as Nazism and fascism have left bitter experiences for humanity and history. consequently, the author expresses his concern about the transition from perfectionism to authoritarianism and considers understanding the basis of modern public law as the mechanism to prevent this transition.Therefore, the legal system in a government that is bounded to ethics and religion must recognize and guarantee the values of the public such as the rule of law, separation of powers, accountability, supervision and balance, transparency, fundamental rights and freedoms for the citizens, etc. In this way, It will help to spread morality in the society. we propose that the achievement of a virtuous society is directly linked with good governance, correct management of public resources and their optimal allocation to public needs, and efficient management of conflict of interests among members of the political society. These will give the citizens the opportunity to live a dignified life and the opportunity to think about moral virtues and the meaning of life and will reduce immorality and vices in society
- …
