philosophy
Hamedeh Rastaei; Nayere Kazemi
Abstract
Predestination and discretion is one of the long-standing topics in the history of human thought. In order to solve the problem of human free will, the will as one of the main foundations of voluntary action has been the focus of philosophers. Philosophers such as Avicenna and Mulla Sadra, by rejecting ...
Read More
Predestination and discretion is one of the long-standing topics in the history of human thought. In order to solve the problem of human free will, the will as one of the main foundations of voluntary action has been the focus of philosophers. Philosophers such as Avicenna and Mulla Sadra, by rejecting the sequence in the foundations of voluntary action, consider will to be one of the fundamentals of voluntary action and one of the things that are forced and forced, and yet they consider man to be free because he has a will, even if it is a forced will. Allameh Jafari is one of the thinkers who, with his psychological and anthropological precisions, by distinguishing volitional matters and types of human wills, considered the dominance of "I" or "human nature" to be the most important and main factor in the will. The problem of the distress of human will has been favorably explained in the analyzes of Allameh Jafari and the expression of the role of the ego or human nature in achieving the will. I or the human nature has gained more power and mastery with the increase of knowledge and awareness, as a result, the influence of algebraic factors will decrease and human agency in actions will increase. Also, in another view, with his plan for a reasonable life for humans, he places human desires on a level beyond natural and forced desires and under the shadow of rationality and conscience .
Hamid Eskandari; Hassan Rahbar
Abstract
The Masnavi has been read as if Rumi believed either in determination or free will, or he hesitated between the two. Here we reveal a new interpretation that how he avoids both of these. His position is out of this game entirely. We have explained that he thinks of the disputation between two sides as ...
Read More
The Masnavi has been read as if Rumi believed either in determination or free will, or he hesitated between the two. Here we reveal a new interpretation that how he avoids both of these. His position is out of this game entirely. We have explained that he thinks of the disputation between two sides as an endless one made by God to cover up a great mystery. As far as we could, we tried to explore the entire Masnavi and interpret all relevant verses in a consistent context, rather than decontextualizing and treating some parts in isolation from the overall flow of the text. Our Assumption, unlike other commentators, is that his perspective deeply (not superficially) differs from that of the philosophers and theologians. We have quoted the commentators wherever necessary and then shown why and how they made mistakes in understanding his words and thought that he believed in determinism or free will.
Arash khaksari renani; Mir Saeed Mousavi Karimi
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to criticize Daniel Dennett's main argument which has been formulated to explain and justify the compatibility of Human's mental phenomena, particularly his free will, with causal determinism on the basis of ontological naturalism (Physicalism). The article begins with ...
Read More
The purpose of this article is to criticize Daniel Dennett's main argument which has been formulated to explain and justify the compatibility of Human's mental phenomena, particularly his free will, with causal determinism on the basis of ontological naturalism (Physicalism). The article begins with the formulation of this argument. Then, the theories of naturalism and evolution as the backgrounds of Dennett's thesis are explained. Dennett tries to justify the premises of his argument by a novel interpretation of casual determinism based on a difference between casual determinism and inevitability. Finally, it is shown that Dennett's solution for making a compatibility between free will and causal determinism is insufficient and unsatisfactory, and, thus, he has not solved the deep and historical problem of compatibilism.
zahra khazaei; fatemeh tamadon
Volume 10, Issue 39 , October 2014, , Pages 131-151
Abstract
Abstract
Free will, as the most pivotal human feature, on the one hand, has been considered, in the West, as the most fundamental condition of moral responsibility, and, on the other, based on the world being deterministic, has opposed determinism. A group of morality philosophers, believing in this ...
Read More
Abstract
Free will, as the most pivotal human feature, on the one hand, has been considered, in the West, as the most fundamental condition of moral responsibility, and, on the other, based on the world being deterministic, has opposed determinism. A group of morality philosophers, believing in this opposition, have given the verdicts of exclusiveness to these two concepts, and another group, aiming to solve or repulse this opposition, have tried, with different methods, to make free will and determinism compatible, and they have proposed different statements regarding compatibility. The most important statement has been put forward by John Martin Fisher who suggests semi-compatibility. In his works, he regards free will in moral responsibility as a guiding control and does not consider alternative possibilities. The example of Frankfurt and other similar ones have been highly useful to Fisher in rejecting alternatives. In this paper, after briefly explaining the example of Frankfurt, Fisher’s semi-compatibility will be elaborated. Eventually, it appears that, although Fisher’s understanding has many advantages compared to other statements of compatibility, his ideas are more inclined toward determinism.
fakhr al sadat alavi; muhammad ali ezhei
Volume 9, Issue 35 , October 2013, , Pages 7-18
Abstract
Throughout the history of thought, free will and determinism have sparked offheated and controversial philosophical debates. Changed in form due to time lapse and mankind’s developments, the long-helddebate still addresses the same questions. Opposing the traditional view that free will and determinism ...
Read More
Throughout the history of thought, free will and determinism have sparked offheated and controversial philosophical debates. Changed in form due to time lapse and mankind’s developments, the long-helddebate still addresses the same questions. Opposing the traditional view that free will and determinism are in constant conflict, some philosophers have put forward the idea that they are compatible. Among them, one can refer to P. F. Strawson who is also known for formulating the idea of reactive attitudes. In his groundbreaking work,Freedom and Resentment, he seeks to focus on reactive attitudes of mankind in his daily life. Stemming from mankind’s nature and representing his need for respect and goodwill, these attitudes are inseparable from his interactions and form an adequate basis for holding others responsible. This paper seeks to shed some light on Strawson’s approach to free will and determinism.
farah ramin
Abstract
Man’s free will is one of the important issues dealt with by two philosophers: Sadr-ol-Mote'allehin, founder of “transcendent theosophy”, and Jaspers, an atheistic existentialist philosopher. To compare the ideas of these two philosophers, regarding the differences between the basics ...
Read More
Man’s free will is one of the important issues dealt with by two philosophers: Sadr-ol-Mote'allehin, founder of “transcendent theosophy”, and Jaspers, an atheistic existentialist philosopher. To compare the ideas of these two philosophers, regarding the differences between the basics elements of their thoughts, a cautious approach is necessary. Included among the issues which bring Jasper’s philosophy close to that of Sadra are Jaspers' attention to Man and his emphasis on “soul” or “existence” as the essential part of human being, an element of which is the individual's free will, the definition of “free will”, “will”, and “freedom”, his viewpoint on a free human being and the relation between "free will "and “transcendence”. Offering the most primary views of the two philosophers on the complicated subject of Man’s free will, the present article is to point out the similarities and differences between the two philosophical traditions and make comments on the mentioned philosopher's way of thinking.
