675648c2785e9a3

نسبت فلسفه و شعر در آرمانشهر اقبال و افلاطون

نوع مقاله: علمی-پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار علوم سیاسی (اندیشه سیاسی)، گروه علوم اجتماعی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران

چکیده

افلاطون، متفکر یونانی و اقبال، اندیشمند اسلامی در اندیشه خود صورتی از آرمانشهر را ترسیم نموده اند. با وجود برخی شباهت‌ها، آنچه در آرمانشهر این دو متفکر از همدیگر دارای تمایزات اساسی است نوع نگاه آنها به شعر و رابطه و نسبت بین شعر و فلسفه در آرمانشهر است. این مقاله تلاش دارد با روش تفسیری جایگاه شعر و نسبت آن را با فلسفه در آرمانشهر افلاطون و اقبال مورد بررسی قرار دهد. به طور کلی افلاطون نگاه منفی و بازدارنده­‌ای به شعر در آرمانشهر دارد و شعر را در مقابل فلسفه می‌داند، درحالی که اقبال به نقش مثبت شعر در آرمانشهر قائل است و با تاکید بر ارتباط بین شعر و فلسفه، شاعر و فیلسوف را دارای هدف یکسان می‌داند. مهمترین دلیل تفاوت این نسبت، در نوع نگاه این دو متفکر به شعر از جهت معرفتی است. افلاطون شعر را واجد هیچ‌گونه معرفت نمی‌­داند و بنابراین درآرمانشهری که فیلسوفان حاکم هستند، حکم به نفی شعر و اخراج شاعران از شهر می‌دهد اما در تفکر اقبال در بستر اندیشه ایرانی- اسلامی، شعر معرفت­بخش و منعکس‌کننده واقعیت و بنابراین دارای پیوند با معرفت فلسفی است و از این جهت حضور شعر و شاعران برای آرمانشهر ضروری است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Philosophy and Poetry in the Ideal State of Iqbāl and Plato

نویسنده [English]

  • Abdolrasool Hasanifar
Assistant Professor of political science, Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran
چکیده [English]

Designing an ideal state or a city in which the desirable situation of the human society has been illustrated and the way to its realization is an issue and concern that all the thinkers who have come up with a comprehensive view of their times have followed. To put it in more general terms, it can be said that this ideal state is a kind of human desire at all times and places so that the human can transcend the present state of the society, in which problems, frustrations and suffering have been added, into an ideal society, not imaginary, to achieve the best opportunities in the city or in other words, human happiness in all fields.
Many thinkers have designed a form of the ideal state in their thought. Plato, the Greek philosopher of the Ancient Period, and Muḥammad Iqbāl, an Iranian-Islamic thinker in contemporary times, are among these thinkers who have designed a form of the ideal state in their thought.
Despite such a common tendency in designing the ideal state, the type, purpose and principles of this ideal state and the relation between poetry and philosophy are distinct and different in each case. In this regard, considering the importance of this issue and the influence of the thought of the two abovementioned thinkers in our time and territory, the attempt to recognize the ideal state of Plato and Muḥammad Iqbāl, and the differences and the reasons for it, can be the source of many of our time issues.
One of the most important aspects of the difference of the thought between these two thinkers is the different view on the role of the poetry and its relation to the philosophy in the ideal state. Accordingly, in this paper, it has been attempted from this point of view that the thought of these two thinkers is examined in a hermeneutic method to explain the reasons for and why this different relation appears in the ideal state.
A hermeneutic method and reading the text are used to examine this issue. In other words, it attempts to address the issue by asking questions and research questions against the texts of two thinkers.
Accordingly, after a brief introduction of two thinkers and influential foundations of their thought, article describes the ideal state and various aspects of it. In the following, the reasons for the difference in their view of the poetry and poets in relation to the philosophy have been examined.
In general, both thinkers in designing their ideal state firstly describe the present situation and problems of their time, and with pathology, they are seeking out and attaining the desired state of the epistemology and ontology.
Plato considers the realization of the ideal state in the transition from mythos to Logos and removing the shadows and getting to the true knowledge of ideas, and at the top of them is the good idea, a knowledge that can guide wisdom in all respects and will transcend it from any conventional knowledge with one reality. In Plato's view, such knowledge, which all other sciences are its prelude and premise, must be called as dialectical knowledge, a knowledge which the mind acquires without realizing the sense, and only through a rational activity in the field of abstract affairs, a knowledge that is only available to the philosopher and others do not benefit from it, and for this reason, the ruler of the ideal state must also be such a philosopher.
The Ideal state of Iqbāl as a thinker with Iranian-Islamic sides is different from Plato. One of these differences is the emphasis on poetry. In other words, Iqbāl has special attention to persian poetry along with his studies in philosophy and select persian poetry to express their thoughts. This caused a fundamental transformation in his thoughts. In this way, through his poetry Iqbāl was able to keep alive the persian culture in the India at the time when Britain tried to change the culture of India by changing the language. On the other hand, Iqbāl created a new capacity and field for contemporary poetry, a capacity that had long been neglected.
Iqbāl's ideal state can be found in works such as "So what should the eastern people do?", "Message from the East" (Payām-i Mashriq), "Persian Psalms", Zabūr-i ʿAjam, and "Jāwīd Nāma". At first, Iqbāl criticizes the state of the human and today's modern world, designing the world and another human being from this perspective. Iqbāl regards the modern society as a kind of absolutism, which is the result of mankind's misery.
Against such a situation that both the west is caught up with and also that it has alienated the east from itself, Iqbāl sees the solution as the ideal state that it is based on solid principles in which man is not alien to himself and his world. Although no specific name can be called on this city, Iqbāl has called this city in Jāwīd Nāma as "Marghdīn", a city that the description and features of it have been mentioned in Iqbāl's various works. It is a city that is beautiful in appearance and it is healthy in terms of living conditions, where humans are not captive and alien to themselves.
Plato's and Iqbāl's view of the ideal state in the relation of the poetry and philosophy are fundamentally different. Generally, Plato has a negative attitude toward the poetry in the ideal state, and considers the poetry and poets against philosophy and philosophers while Iqbāl thoroughly believes in the positive role of the poetry in the ideal state and with emphasizing the relation between the poetry and philosophy, he considers the same the poet and philosopher based on purpose. The main reason for this difference is the method of the attitude of these two thinkers towards the poetry from the epistemic aspect. Plato does not consider the poetry to be any knowledge and reality and therefore, in the ideal state that philosophers are ruling, he orders the rejection of the poetry and the banishment of the poets from the ideal state. But in Iqbāl's thought, the poetry has knowledge and reflects reality and even due to its profound influence, any further knowledge comes to the work of reforming the city and society. Therefore, with a deep link between the philosophic knowledge and poetry, the philosopher and poet are one in Iqbāl's view and both of them have rational knowledge and their presence is essential for the ideal state.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • philosophy
  • poetry
  • Politics
  • ideal state
  • Iqbāl
  • Plato
استراترن، پل (1383)، آشنایی با آکویناس، ترجمۀ شهرام حمزه‌ای، تهـران: مرکز.
افلاطون(1380)، دورۀکاملآثارافلاطون، ترجمۀ محمدحسنلطفی،تهران:خوارزمی.
اقباللاهوری،محمد(1386)، کلیاتاقباللاهوری،به‌کوششاکبربهداروند،تهران:زوار.
اقباللاهوری،محمد(بی‌تا)،ضرب کلیم،به‌کوششناصرالدین،لاهور: فرخپبلشرز.
اقباللاهوری،محمد (1370)، کلیات اشعار فارسی،بامقدمهوپانوشت‌هایاحمدسروش،تهران:سنائی.
اقباللاهوری،محمد (1382)،کلیات فارسی، به‌سعیواهتمامپروینقائمی،تهران: پیمان.
اقباللاهوری،محمد (1387)، سیر فلسفه در ایران، ترجمۀامیرحسینآریانپور،تهران:امیرکبیر.
اقباللاهوری،محمد(بی‌تا)،احیایفکردینیدراسلام،ترجمۀاحمدآرام،تهران:مؤسسۀ فرهنگیمنطقۀنشرپژوهش‌هایاسلامی.
اکرام، سیدمحمد اکرم (1982)،اقبال در راه مولوی، لاهور: آکادمی پاکستان.
بقایی،محمد(1379)، شرارۀزندگی،تهران: فردوس.
سعیدی،غلامرضا(1356)، اقبالشناسی،تهران: بعثت.
شیمل،آنهماری(1387)،محمدرسولخدا، ترجمۀحسنلاهوتی،تهران:علمیوفرهنگی.
عبدالحکیم،خلیفه(1370)، مولوی،نیچه،واقبال،ترجمۀمحمدبقایی،تهران: حکمت.
کویره، الکساندر(1360)، سیاست ازنظرافلاطون،ترجمۀامیرحسینجهانبگلو،تهران:خوارزمی.
گاتری،دبلیو. کی. سی. (1377)، تاریخفلسفۀیونان،افلاطون: جمهور،ج15، ترجمۀحسنفتحی،تهران: فکرروز.
گادامر،هانسگئورگ(1382)، مثالخیردرفلسفۀافلاطونیـ ارسطویی، ترجمۀ حسن فتحی، تهران: حکمت.
محققداماد،سیدمصطفی(1390)، «الهیاتمحیطزیست: گزارشی از آرمان‌شهر علامه اقبال لاهوری»،اخلاق زیستی،س 1، ش 1.
مِر،کستون(1383)، افلاطون،ترجمۀفاطمهخوانساری،تهران: مؤسسۀپژوهشیحکمتوفلسفۀایران.
نقوی،محمدعلی(1385)، ایدئولوژیانقلابیاقبال،ترجمۀممبحری،تهران: اسلامی.
یگر،ورنر(1376)، پایدیا،ترجمۀمحمدحسنلطفی،تهران: خوارزمی.
یاسپرس،کارل(1357)، افلاطون،ترجمۀمحمدحسنلطفی،تهران: خوارزمی.
یونسی،مصطفی(1387)، نسبتفلسفۀسیاسیوفلسفۀزبانافلاطون،تهران: فرهنگصبا.
 
Aristotle (1999), Politics, trans. Benjamin Jowett, Kitchener: Batoche Books.
Barker, Ernest (1964),Greek Political Theory: Plato and His Predecessors, New York and London: Paperbacks.
Craig, Edward (1998), Routledge Eneyclopedia of philosophy, vol. l5, London: Routledge.
Plato (2004), Republic, translated from the New Standard Greek Text with Introduction by C. D. C. Reeve, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
Runes, Dagobert David (1960), Dictionary of philosophy, New York: Philosophical Library.
Sinclair, R.K. (1991), Democracy and participation in Atens, Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
Smith, NicholasD. (2001),What Is Liberty for Plato and Aristotle on Political Freedom? with C. Johnson; Skepsis, vol. 12.
Strauss, Leo (1959), On Classical Political Philosophy, in What Is Political Philosophy? andOther Studies, Chicago and London: the University of Chicago Press.
Strauss, Leo (1987), History of political philosophy, Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey (ed.), Chicago and London: Chicago University Press.