Roqayeh Mazaheri; Shahin Aawani
Abstract
From Kant’s view, freedom is the universal property of humans as the autonomy of will. He established morals on the ground of freedom through legislation of Practical Reason. In Kant’s philosophy, freedom is a ground, based on which humans have dignity as an individual and human beings. The ...
Read More
From Kant’s view, freedom is the universal property of humans as the autonomy of will. He established morals on the ground of freedom through legislation of Practical Reason. In Kant’s philosophy, freedom is a ground, based on which humans have dignity as an individual and human beings. The concept of freedom is conjunct with moral law and practical reason and is not found in the scope of nature. The moral law being freedom in a sense elevates humans from the scope of nature and gives them value and dignity, which is based on freedom and autonomy. A moral human creates value for the world, and human is the end of creation. The Intermediator of human relationship as a moral being and the end of nature is the freedom concept. This article is written concentrating on Kant’s view of “The relationship between dignity and humans freedom”. Freedom is neither an objective matter nor the subject of cognition because the concept of freedom is related to the rational world and is realized in the behavior and disposition of humans. Everything has a price or dignity in the land of ends. Whatever has a price could be traded, but what is more valuable than any value and has no equivalent whatsoever is dignity. The humanity of humans is the only being that has “dignity” as long as it is capable of having morality.
mostafa Abedi jighe; Mohsen Bagherzadeh meskibaf; mohammad Asghari
Abstract
To realize human autonomy, Descartes establishes the dialectical relation between consciousness and freedom through the three essential elements of understanding, will, and divine power. Through the free will of negative, as methodic doubt and the destruction of all presuppositions, the basis of consciousness ...
Read More
To realize human autonomy, Descartes establishes the dialectical relation between consciousness and freedom through the three essential elements of understanding, will, and divine power. Through the free will of negative, as methodic doubt and the destruction of all presuppositions, the basis of consciousness is referred to the human being and releases it from external authority. By building a knowledge based on the innate concepts that come from within and without mediation consciously re-establishes knowledge. In this way, human beings not only gain autonomy of understanding but also freedom through the effort of a systematic and restrictive understanding. Because with the entry of the limiting of understanding in the area of the will, freedom is no longer meant to be nonchalance and lawlessness. But freedom within the limits of certain judgments of understanding and its legislation and divine power are enclosed. Through this process, it is promoted to positive freedom. Descartes, by declaring that the natural imaginations are verifiably confirmed by divine confirmation, relied on God to guarantee the knowledge of the understanding and in this way, he describes freedom as God's guarantee. Therefore, in Descartes' philosophy, the realization of positive freedom under dialectical conditions form on the basis of the complex relationship between will, intelligence, and divine power, and all of the elements that constitute a whole will only have meaning with each other.
hajar nili ahmad abadi; ali karbasi zadeh
Abstract
This paper aims to conduct a comparative study of the views held by Allameh Tabataba'i and Kant on the social freedom. Their views are introduced in the first two parts and compared and contrasted in the last part. Allameh Tabataba'i believes the true freedom to be freedom from all restraints but the ...
Read More
This paper aims to conduct a comparative study of the views held by Allameh Tabataba'i and Kant on the social freedom. Their views are introduced in the first two parts and compared and contrasted in the last part. Allameh Tabataba'i believes the true freedom to be freedom from all restraints but the submission to God. Kant, however, deems true freedom to be freedom of the will. They both believe that the mankind first resists the establishment of social life but finally accepts it and enacts the law to secure the society and enjoy the social freedom. In Allameh Tabataba'i's belief, the law should be based on monotheism, resurrection, ethics, and reason, while for Kant, freedom of the will and the self constitute the basis for the law. They, however, share the belief that the law by itself could not help the mankind to establish the social freedom. Allameh Tabataba'i declares monotheism and ethical faith as the basis of the law, and Kant deems ethical rules based on pure reason its prerequisite.
ali nazari
Abstract
Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55) focused his attention on the existential elements of our existence; Among these elements the concepts of anxiety, dread, guilt and alienation are of primary importance. Existentialism has tried to discover the mysteries of man’s existence, and helped him to find a way ...
Read More
Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55) focused his attention on the existential elements of our existence; Among these elements the concepts of anxiety, dread, guilt and alienation are of primary importance. Existentialism has tried to discover the mysteries of man’s existence, and helped him to find a way out of his loneliness, anxiety and dread that threaten his existence and survival. Man’s dread caused by the assumption that he was thrown into this alien world. Pinter has depicted the images of life and death, being and non-being, and the reality of man’s reduction into a cipher of non-being. His drama is a bitter commentary on human being’s existence. In Pinter’s world, peace and security remain a mere illusion, vulnerable to utter annihilation. His characters are paralyzed by anxiety and dread. Man's survival depends upon his existence in a room. It concludes that man’s place in the world as Kierkegaard claimed is "insecure and non-securable" (Wick, 2006). Man is thrown into the world, and in his loneliness is paralyzed by anxiety. The source of this anxiety as Kierkegaard claimed is nothingness.
Jolley Oladotun Ogunkoya
Abstract
This work examines the nature and causes of crises that are bedeviling human society, and argues the thesis that freedom has a pivotal role to play in the emergence of crises in society. The work takes it for granted that there are different forms of crisis and that the highest form of crisis in the ...
Read More
This work examines the nature and causes of crises that are bedeviling human society, and argues the thesis that freedom has a pivotal role to play in the emergence of crises in society. The work takes it for granted that there are different forms of crisis and that the highest form of crisis in the world is war, which itself, has many variants. Consequently, when I speak of the causes of war, I am by so-doing talking about the phenomenon of war as a representative of all forms of war and as an example of a form of crisis in society. I am quite aware of the various factors that have been identified by scholars as the causes of crises, but there seems to be an omission of the place of freedom in their submissions. The paper therefore argues that all forms of deprivation are denials of freedom and that crises are mostly products of unhealthy social relations which are often exhibited in a form of either a denial of freedom or an excessive exercise of it.
ali karbasi zadeh; faatemh soleymani dehnavi
Abstract
There are various and sometimes contradictory ideas about Rousseau's thoughts. Some classify him in the group of enlightenment thinkers and some acknowledge him as an anti-enlightenment philosopher. There is no doubt that Rousseau's thought was affected by some elements of enlightenment, however, he ...
Read More
There are various and sometimes contradictory ideas about Rousseau's thoughts. Some classify him in the group of enlightenment thinkers and some acknowledge him as an anti-enlightenment philosopher. There is no doubt that Rousseau's thought was affected by some elements of enlightenment, however, he criticized most of its characteristics as well, and challenged rationalism in the age of mastery of reason. The significance of humanity and the freedom of human beings is one of the central concepts in Rousseau's thought, but he considered reason and rationality as a tool for decreasing the very freedom. In Rousseau's view the culture of modernity not only has been constituted due to absence of morality, but also the development of science and art has not improved human's life at all. He believed that only the natural state of human's essence can release him. This paper will explain the enlightenment principles in Rousseau's thought, and compare the affinities and dissimilarities of his beliefs with the other thinkers of the age of enlightenment.
meysam sefid khosh; yousef shaghol
Abstract
John Rawls has delineated his "A theory of Justice" fundamentally in contrast with the utilitarianism, because he thinks that utilitarianism is ready to sacrifice the freedom and justice for the common people's utility and happiness. To present a theory which could be far from any vitiations of utilitarianism ...
Read More
John Rawls has delineated his "A theory of Justice" fundamentally in contrast with the utilitarianism, because he thinks that utilitarianism is ready to sacrifice the freedom and justice for the common people's utility and happiness. To present a theory which could be far from any vitiations of utilitarianism and its extremist individualism, Rawls found that it must be necessary to review the functions and the essential notions of Hegel's Philosophy of Right once again, since Hegel himself in confront with the ideas of the thinkers of Enlightenment Age had been concerned with the same problems in the utilitarianism, too. In fact, Rawls appreciates the advantage of Hegel's approach for his theory of justice and its basic conceptions. In this paper, the writers want to show that how Rawls offers a distinctive account of the most important elements of Hegel's Philosophy of Right to achieve his own intention, which introduces it according to the liberalism. In this way, Rawls recognizes two versions of liberalism and realizes his own theory along with Kant and Hegel's standpoints. It seems that to attain his aim, Rawls, despite his elementary argument about the Kantian character of his theory, has to leave Kantian aspects behind and embrace Hegelian attitudes at least in some main principles. Explicating the basic sides of this thought turn is the other purpose of the paper.
susan babit
Abstract
A familiar criticism of Kant, made by Hegel and his followers, J .S. Mill and others, is that there are no maxims that are in fact contradictory, as required for morality on Kant's view. In this paper, I discuss the suggestion that our capacity for rational reflection itself implies universality, and ...
Read More
A familiar criticism of Kant, made by Hegel and his followers, J .S. Mill and others, is that there are no maxims that are in fact contradictory, as required for morality on Kant's view. In this paper, I discuss the suggestion that our capacity for rational reflection itself implies universality, and that it is this universality that obliges us to act morally. I consider the idea that self-understanding depends upon practical identity, and I argue that we are sometimes obliged to act morally because of the nature of practical identity and its role in deliberation and self-awareness.
