عنوان مقاله [English]
Religious studies use various methods such as rational, transitive and intuitive. Among these methods, transitive method with emphasis on traditions and innate reason is the only way for understanding religion for Tafkik School. By distinguishing between innate reason and human reason, this school gives the validity to innate reason. Because philosophy uses human reason, the school of Tafkik considered this knowledge invalid and considered it a competitor to its view of what it considers to be law and religion, and thus sought to criticize the knowledge of philosophy. The reason of Anti-philosophy in Tafkik School can be divided under two factors: Epistemic (causal) and non-epistemic (causal). Epistemic factors are “Uncertainty of philosophy”, “invalidity of logic”, “Interpretation of religious appearance and scripture by philosophy”, “Dedication of Philosophy in Narratives” and “disagreement between two methods” and non-epistemic factors are “difficulty of philosophical issues”, “Creation emulation or imitation”, and “Marginalize Ahlul Bayt”. In this essay, by focusing on the arguments and reasons put forward by the proponents of the Tafkik School, with the emphasis on Sheikh Mojtaba Qazvini, the lack of implication of the mentioned principles on the claim of the Tafkik School, has been explained.