Speech by the conference secretary   (Prof. Masoud Omid)

Philosophical Research much has been written about life. Yet this research has primarily concerned the purpose and meaning of life, the relationship between life and ethics, law, politics, and related fields, or the relationship between broader philosophical categories and particular concepts—such as existence, essence, subjectivity, Dasein, and others—and life. At the same time, some philosophical research and reflections of the past century, both worldwide and in Iran, have drawn attention to the subjectivity of life itself and made it their specific focus. In other words, they have sought to examine life itself and its characteristics: life insofar as it is life.

Accordingly, the first international conference on the philosophy of life in Iran has focused its attention and focus on the philosophical understanding of life based on life itself, in order to confirm and strengthen this purely life-centered approach. Therefore, the meaning of philosophy of life or philosophical biography in this conference is, first of all, philosophizing about life as it is life and not merely the goal or meaning of life or ethics in life, etc. This philosophical approach to focusing on and centralizing life itself is evident from the titles and topics proposed by the conference. However, in the history of Iranian conferences and at the international level, there has never been a conference that takes life itself and purely philosophical discussions about it as its subject. In this regard, it is a matter of great pride and satisfaction that the University of Tabriz with the efforts of the Philosophy Department and the Research Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty of Literature, Philosophy and Language has taken the lead in this important matter.

Philosophy of Life Conference: A Call to Move Beyond the Forgetfulness of Life

What is the meaning of a philosophical conference on life? It is, above all, the initiation and pursuit of a fundamental and genuinely philosophical dialogue about life. Its purpose is to contribute philosophically to the search for possible answers to the important questions surrounding life. The conference therefore has two aims: first, to call philosophical thought out of its neglect of life; and second, to engage as many philosophers as possible in developing diverse and possible answers to the question of life and in creating a dialogue among perspectives centered on life.

Our Destiny: Living, Planning, Philosophizing, and Learning About Life

 Our destiny is only to live and to plan for it. We are called to live and plan for it, and everything will flow from the core and context of life and its plan. Just as when the players of a football team enter the football field, they have come only to play, we are also present in the world of life and among lives by appointment only to live and plan for it. Our appointment in the world and in relation to others is such that there is only one way in it, and that is to just live (destiny for life) and think about life (planning for life). For example, the state of readiness of a football player, the group of players, coaches, the field and the entire existing situation call the players to something called football. Similarly, the human condition, the flow of life and existing lives also call us to live and plan for it. Our presence among lives is only to live and walk and manage it, and that is all. With this description, we can speak of both living and knowing life and building a life. Of course, this appreciation and planning of life is not based on the assumption that life is separated from its foundation, infrastructure, conditions of possibility, etc. But the point is that we understand and plan for this complex under the title of life, in relation to it, and for it.

The Conatus of Life: The Unity of Destiny and Planning

The conatus of life is the unity of the destiny and planning of life: we are given over to life, yet at the same time we are called upon to plan it. The conatus encompasses both the destiny of life—the imperative to live, preserve, sustain, and continue life—and the necessity of planning life: understanding it, directing it, shaping it, and even giving life. In this sense, we are simultaneously involved in the destiny of life and in the task of planning and making it.

Today, the conatus of life can be understood as our destiny and our planning for life. This destiny and planning involve sustaining, intensifying, strengthening, enriching, and perfecting life through philosophical, scientific, historical, and other inquiries into life, as well as through defining, evaluating, determining, and improving its course.

The History of Philosophy, the Forgetfulness of Life, and Philosophical Biography

The history of philosophy until the last century has been a history of forgetting the subjectivity of life for philosophy and philosophical biography in its deep and rich meaning. It is only since the late nineteenth century that life has been discovered by some philosophers as a philosophical point of departure and an independent subject for philosophizing. This attention, after a hiatus, has been renewed since the second half of the twentieth century.

Plato is the philosopher of the duality of forgetting-remembering. He seeks to resolve this issue through dialectics. For him, the most important and original recollection is the recollection of the ideal. Hence, dialectics is the process of moving from forgetting to remembering. Kant can also be understood under the duality of forgetting-remembering. This means that he invites us to emerge from the neglect of the dogma of metaphysics that we have fallen into in the history of philosophy and to engage in its transcendental critique. Heidegger is also a philosopher of the duality of forgetting-remembering, and in his opinion, to get out of it, we must turn to ontological phenomenology. For him, the most important and original recollection is the recollection of being. With this description, existential phenomenology provides the basis for the move from forgetting to remembering. That is why Heidegger speaks of forgetting being and calls forgetting the search for beings instead of being, the result of which is nothing but nihilism. Even further, Nietzsche can be considered a dual philosopher of forgetting-remembering based on nihilism and the re-creation of values. The re-creation of values occurs in the course of active nihilism. For Nietzsche, the most authentic recollection is the return to the Dionysian life and the passage from the Apollonian life. However, the theories of Platonic dialectics, Kantian transcendental criticism, Heideggerian ontological phenomenology, and Nietzschean active nihilism contain provisions for escaping from forgetting. Gilson has also addressed the issue of forgetting existence in the history of philosophy from another perspective. In his opinion, the history of philosophy has mainly been concerned with the nominal and general meaning of Being. And this even includes Aristotle himself. While the main meaning of Being is its descriptive and active meaning that implies the actuality and origin of works, and even when we use the term Being in this sense, we must understand it as existence. This meaning is not fundamentally abstract and cannot be imagined.

But, in addition to the above philosophical forgetfulness, we can also point out and think about another philosophical forgetfulness, both in the history of philosophy and in lived life, namely, the forgetfulness of the philosophical question of life. Perhaps it can be said that the greatest forgetfulness in the history of philosophy is the forgetfulness of life for the world of philosophy. Because we are nothing but life: my life, the life of another, and the lives of others.

The Delayed Philosophical Dialogue with Life in the History of Philosophy

 In the history of philosophy, philosophical vitalism in the specific sense, i.e. philosophical philosophical vitalism that is solely centered on life (and not focused on components, conditions, necessities, etc.), has been delayed and has only shown its presence explicitly and clearly in the recent period. However, philosophical vitalism in the general sense, i.e. whether non-philosophical or philosophical philosophical vitalism and based on the centrality of principles, areas, types, and necessities, etc., has been present more or less since the Greek period. However, the important point is that the specific meaning of philosophical vitalism has not been considered in the Greek period, the Middle Ages, and the modern period. Life (and not its types, principles, etc.) has not been considered as a point of departure and philosophical subject for philosophical studies and research (like being and existence). It is only in the recent and contemporary period that some efforts have been made in this regard. This attention has gradually begun in the last century and with the turn from epistemology in the history of philosophy. This possibility has been made possible by the shift from epistemology to different fields, namely, the field of life (Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Dilthey, Bergson and Camus), practical wisdom (James, Peirce, Dewey, Rorty), language (Wittgenstein) and especially existential matters (Jaspers, Sartre, Heidegger). In addition to these fundamental changes, some important discussions on life by the young Heidegger and the phenomenologists (Husserl, Levinas and Merleau-Ponty) and some hermeneuticsians (Gadamer and Ricoeur) should be added. And even the entry of some analytical philosophers (Nagel, Solomon) as well as some members of the Frankfurt School (Habermas) and some others such as Agamben, Kishik and Badiou, etc. into the field of life was mentioned. Among them, the most important and prominent philosophical research has been carried out by philosophers who have specifically targeted life itself and made it the subject of their philosophical thinking (such as Michel Henry in The Phenomenology of Life or Hans Jonas in The Phenomenon of Life: Towards a Philosophical Biology). In Iran, some philosophical thinkers have also paid special attention to the issue of life, such as Mohammad Taqi Jafari and Mostafa Malekian.

The Semantic Transformation from Man to Human Life: From Philosophical Anthropology to a Philosophy of Life

Given the above delay, until today the starting point of most studies has been prescriptive philosophical vitalism or anthropology. But it seems that these studies and their starting point are undergoing a shift and replacement. This shift or replacement can be considered as a Copernican revolution in some philosophical studies. Explain that since the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, some philosophical perspectives have sought to change the starting point from man to human life or life itself. Accordingly, in these perspectives, the meaning of man is understood in terms of life and the manner and type of life are described. Also, anthropology is changing to philosophy of life or philosophical philosophical vitalism.

The possibility of this transition and this Copernican revolution has been in the shadow of the entry of the meaning of life into the definition of man, and in three ways: 1. Either the dignity of life has been taken into account and highlighted in the definition and meaning of man, that is, man has been considered in terms of his life. 2. Either the historical change in the meaning of man from a rational animal, subject, etc. to human life has been acknowledged. 3. Or in this semantic change in the history of the concept of man, the emphasis has been solely on the concept of life instead of the conventional meaning of man.

In other words, it is as if the history of the evolution of the meaning of human to life, or the relationship of life to the meaning of human, has gradually taken on various forms, such as: concrete (attached to the title of human) obligatory (required by human) inductive (included in the title of human) simile (similar to human) synonym (synonymous with the word human) equivalent (corresponding to human) and so on).

Periodization of the History of Philosophy and the Delayed Dialogue with Life

The history of philosophy can be divided and periodized in various ways. For example, the common division is its division into the Greek, medieval, modern, and contemporary periods. However, other divisions and periodizations have also been proposed based on philosophies, schools, movements, philosophers, etc. One possible periodization is that each period of the history of philosophy can be considered in terms of the relationship of philosophy or the dialogue of philosophy with a specific field and matter; as follows: The Greek period was the establishment of the relationship of philosophy with nature and then existence. The medieval period was the establishment of the relationship of philosophy with religion. The modern period was the establishment of the relationship of philosophy with science and history. And in the contemporary period, we are faced with the establishment of relations with various fields, such as psychology (Brentano and Husserl in the philosophy of arithmetic), logic (Russell), culture (Cassirer), language (Wittgenstein), art/mainly literature (Rorty and Heidegger), and... But one of the relationships that is emerging in the contemporary period is the establishment of the relationship of philosophy with life. This time, philosophy, in a specific current, seeks to show its capacities, capabilities, and fruits in relation to life and in dialogue and conversation with it, for example, in Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Dilthey, Bergson, Michel Henry, Agamben, Kishik, Luc Frey, Alain de Botton, Hans Jonas, and...

Two Shortcomings in the History of Philosophy in Relation to “Life”

Life is a practical concept, not a philosophical one

It seems that the most important reason for philosophy's delay in entering the subjectivity of life and establishing it as a philosophical point of departure has been the inability of the history of philosophy to elevate the meaning and concept of life from practical and quasi-philosophical to purely philosophical second rationality

In ancient times and the Middle Ages, and especially in recent centuries, life had more or less a philosophical aspect, but it was neither the subject of philosophies nor was its philosophical value at the level of existence, being, essence, or the like. The point of departure of Greece was from the matter of materials. After Heraclitus and Parmenides and Plato's philosophical processing, Greek philosophical thought became a mature and systematic existential metaphysics in Aristotle. However, this philosophical and historical transformation regarding life did not occur in Greece. However, the historical and philosophical contexts of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries have prepared our current philosophical thought for the emergence of a philosophy or philosophies or philosophers centered on life to enter this field. Today, a new meaning of life, which originated through a set of rich philosophical discussions of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (as if at the level of the concept and meaning of existence in the Greek period or the subject in the period of modern philosophy), has emerged. And further, it is as if these studies focused on life are waiting for a philosopher on the level of the Aristotle of life or the Kant of life to summarize and organize the new deep and extensive philosophical discussions under life. With the emergence of philosophies focused on life issues in the last century, the concept of life has become more fruitful and has gained the ability to It has gained more understanding, organization, and calendar. It is hoped that this beginning will gradually turn into a fruitful flow.

The exclusivity of biographical studies to prescriptive rather than descriptive and analytical

From the Greek period to the last century, philosophical vitalism has been mainly of a prescriptive and recommendatory type. That is, it has basically sought to design a good and necessary life, and not to reflect on, analyze, and describe life as it is life, or to be descriptive and analytical philosophical vitalism. In general, the relationship of the traditional periods in the history of philosophy to life can be considered as follows:

1. The period of Greek philosophy: the period of philosophical vitalism and prescriptive philosophical vitalism, and not descriptive-philosophical philosophical vitalism.

 2. The period of medieval philosophy: the period of religiosity and religious-prescriptive philosophical vitalism, and not descriptive-philosophical philosophical vitalism.

 3. The period of Renaissance: the period of humanism and prescriptive philosophical vitalism, and not descriptive-philosophical philosophical vitalism.

 4. The modern period: the period of philosophical vitalism and prescriptive philosophical vitalism, and not descriptive-philosophical philosophical vitalism

5. The contemporary period: the period of philosophical vitalism and philosophical philosophical vitalism: analytical, descriptive, and prescriptive.

Life Itself or the Appendages of Life?

To enter the field of philosophy of life, a distinction must be made between life itself and its appendages or appendages and appendages. In the history of philosophy, has philosophical thinking about life been and is related to life itself or to its appendages and appendages? The appendages and appendages of life are the titles and aspects that philosophical thinkers have raised in relation to life and have made it their subject or point of departure. However, in the continuation of the history of life research, as well as with the increase in studies and investigations, it has been clear that these titles are related to life, but without specifying what kind of connection they have with life, for example, whether they are fundamental or not, or what kind of foundation and to what degree of fundamentality they are? Or is there a topic that is essentially and solely about life itself and covers it? In the history of biography, life adjuncts can be divided into two categories: prescriptive adjuncts (adjuncts that have been proposed in the space and discourse of prescriptiveness or in an effort to prescribe a good life and life-making, for example, in the Greek period) and descriptive adjuncts (adjuncts that have been proposed in order to describe life as it is, for example, in contemporary philosophy). It is also possible to make a partial classification of life adjuncts, such as dividing adjuncts into 1. Elements of life 2. Components and elements of life 3. Concrete categories of life 4. Fields of life 5. Forms of life 6. Conditions of possibility of life (abstract and concrete) 7. Place of life 8. Types of life 9. Substructure of life 10. Substructure of life 11..... In the following, without considering the general and partial classifications mentioned, we will simply present a historical list of life adjuncts:

 Aristotelian praxis (action according to phronesis/practical reason) , ethos of life (character and nature for sociability and citizenship) , logos and the ideal aspect, and death/end of life (Plato) , utopia of life (Farabi), success of life (Sofism), testability of life (Socrates), happiness of life (Plato and Aristotle), pleasure in life and the joy of life (Epicurus, Razi), conditions of transcendental possibility Experience (or the conditions of abstract possibility of life) and the finality of the organism and the tasks of life (Kant), the benefits and results of life (Mill and Bentham), the satisfaction of life, the well-being (Khayyam), the historical context of the subjectivized organism (Hegel), the life force and the tragic yes to organic life (Nietzsche), the long-standing inner intuition of organic life (Bergson), the praxis or organized and purposeful economic action of life (Marx), the historical world of life and lived experience and historicity. Organism ( Dilthey ) , Life in the life-world / The location of consciousness in the life-world (Husserl) , Life-world / Being in the world and the death of consciousness (Heidegger) , The logic of life (Weigel), The situation of life (Sartre and de Beauvoir), The meaning of life (Camus), Understanding and interpretation of life (Gadamer), The narrative of life (Ricoeur), The form of life (Wittgenstein), The communicative act or the liberating communicative act of life (Habermas), Thinking based on life as... (David Kishik and Asef Bayat), Pathos of life : Independence of life in terms of concrete immanence of life as emergence and the order of pre-appearance and pre-attention to the phenomenon (Michel Henry), phenomenon of life (Jonas), pattern of life (Jafari: based on Rumi and Ali (AS)), meaning, rationality and spirituality of life (Malikian), And... Other general headings can be added to this list, such as: types of life (political, legal, economic, etc.), forms of life (natural, intelligent/artificial, natural-intelligent), lifestyle (traditional, modern), life narrative/biography (self and other), mechanism and/or organism of life, etc.

The Philosophical Present: A Time to Question Life Itself

It seems that the history of philosophy, in its long-term philosophizing, has mostly dealt with life through the margins and appendages and appendages of life. Life has been studied through or through the like, form, being, essence, consciousness, subject, Dasein, existence, etc. But now and in the last century, some philosophers have sought to establish a direct philosophical relationship and encounter with life. They are of the opinion that they should get as close as possible to life itself and not to the intermediaries and appendages of life. They try out approaches, methods and stages to see life eye to eye and understand it directly and discover its philosophical horizon.

Philosophical Questions About Life

Now that the philosophical question of life itself has been largely forgotten in past eras and has only gradually gained attention in the last century, the question can be asked: What philosophical questions about life are we dealing with in the contemporary era?

It seems that today the question of life means a call for philosophical dialogue with life and philosophical understanding of life. The philosophical question of life in the new perspective is the question of life itself as a point of departure, subject and axis and as a philosophical horizon and perspective. That is, starting with the question: Can philosophizing begin with life itself and...?. A philosopher of life is someone who seeks to look at himself and the facts from the very beginning of his philosophical work with life and from the perspective of life. But if such a situation is justified, what questions will he face in the future or with what questions will he advance his philosophical reflections? An example of the questions and topics that can be suggested in the philosophy of life and as a point of departure centered on life are as follows:

 1. Has the history of philosophy been able to give life itself subjectivity, centrality and origin?

2. Have philosophers been able to raise and investigate the subjectivity and centrality of life in philosophy, at least as a given option in their philosophical discussions?

3. What is the philosophical nature of life: What is the philosophical definition of life?

 4. The subject of life: What is the distinction between the subject of life and the abstract self, the pure subject, and Dasein?

5. What is meant by the world of life (life)?

 6. What is the distinction between being alive and life?

 7. The distinction between biology and philosophical vitalism?

8. What is the meaning of the subjectivity of life, the hermeneutics of life, the paidia of life, and the praxis of life?

9. Life: A philosophical or non-philosophical concept?

10. The question of life: problematic or problem?

11. Levels of commitment and/or abstraction in life? The living being: Being or lived or living?

And topics such as: philosophical crises of life, fundamental life (life as foundation), the originality of life, authentic life, aspects and characteristics of life such as: livability, interlives and laboratory, "presence and absence" and "openness and closure" of life, the immanence of life and the lifeworld, the distinction between empirical phenomenalism, existentialism, embodied phenomenalism, phenomenalism of life and vitalism? Life as emergence or phenomenon or...? Pre-reflection or reflection of life? True predicate: being, existence, lived, living or...?, conatus of life, and...

The following are important and crucial questions that need to be addressed in philosophical biographical studies through reflections, discussions, explanations, and analyses. These questions include:

1. Who am I? The answer to this question can be placed under the explanatory understanding of life. (For example, a possible suggestion is to say in the answer: I am a life and a narrative of life (biography), the other and others are also like that.)

2. What is the best life? This question is related to the study of prescriptive understanding of life.

3. How do I shape the best life? This question is related to the area of prescriptive life-building.

-Another question has been raised by Albercamo: Why should I continue with my life

This can be discussed and pondered under Section 1 under the title of Life and Meaning or the question of the meaning of life.?

 Now, when we talk about the absence, oblivion, and alienation of the history of philosophy with respect to life, it is in the context of such fundamental questions and issues that that absence and alienation are understood and raised! Considering such questions and issues, have the history of philosophy and existing philosophies fulfilled and are they fulfilling our philosophical expectations of life?

It is worth noting that the use of titles such as philosophy of life, philosophical biology, metalife, metaphysics of life, and lifeism refers to studies related to the above issues and similar ones.

Life as a Philosophical Issue in Today’s World

It seems that one of the most important philosophical issues in the world today is the question of life in its various aspects. Even beyond this, the philosophical future of the world may be more oriented towards a philosophical paradigm focused on life than on other topics.

The Philosophical Issue in Iran Today: Does Iran Have a Philosophical Question or Questions?

Today's Iran also has philosophical issues. It seems that the most important issue of today's Iran is the issue of life and bioscience. First, life in its philosophical sense, and second, descriptive and philosophical bioscience, not merely prescriptive and recommendatory. Also, one of the secondary and important issues of bioscience in Iran is the issue of the relationship between traditional life and modern life. Before addressing practical issues about life, today's Iran must also pay attention to theoretical issues and problems about life. Prescriptions related to practical life come after theoretical bioscience is addressed. For example, how can someone who does not know the characteristics and differences between traditional and modern life give advice and plan for the current and contemporary life of Iran? This priority is like the priority of knowing the type and model of a car to determine the replacement part for it, or is it the priority of pathology over prescribing the type of medicine for a disease.

New Directions in Contemporary Iranian Philosophical Thought

Today, alongside currents such as new poetry and new theology in Iran, we are also faced with a specific reality and phenomenon called contemporary Iranian philosophy. Of course, contemporary Iranian philosophy shows itself more in the form of currents with new directions than in the form of new philosophies and philosophical schools. In contemporary Iranian philosophical thought, we do not have a specific philosopher, philosophy, or philosophical school to be the vanguard and standard-bearer of modern Iranian philosophy, but the philosophical biases and orientations of contemporary Iran are new.

A New Topic for Contemporary Iranian Philosophy: Philosophical Biography

Some contemporary Iranian philosophers, in addition to the classical and traditional philosophical paths, have thought about the possibility of defining or establishing different philosophical paths; such as Mohammad Taghi Jafari, Henry Corbin, Mostafa Malekian, Mohammad Reza Hakimi, etc. This article suggests that, in addition to the above suggestions, we should also think about the possibility of finding a new philosophical path and subject under the title of philosophical biography or philosophy of life and take it seriously.

Acknowledgments

Finally, I would like to thank the esteemed President of the University, Mr. Dr. A'alami, as well as the esteemed Vice Chancellor for Research, Mr. Dr. Asgari, and the esteemed Vice Chancellor for Research, Faculty of Literature, Mr. Dr. Asghari.

I would also like to express my special gratitude to the participation of domestic and foreign professors in this conference.

Hoping for a fruitful conference on the philosophy of life through taking life thinking seriously