نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

چکیده

پیرس، دیدگاه‌های ناسازگاری درباره‌ی رابطه‌ی علم با اخلاق و دین ارائه می‌دهد. او از یک‌سو، اخلاق و دین را اموری حیاتی می‌داند که برای شناخت آن‌ها باید به حس درونی و غریزه رجوع کرد. از سوی دیگر، در برخی مواضع، دیدگاه‌هایی مخالف این رویکرد دارد. پیرس درنهایت معتقد است که منطق بر اخلاق و اخلاق بر زیبایی‌شناسی استوار است. این مقاله با بررسی ناسازگاری‌های فلسفه‌ی پیرس، نشان می‌دهد که تفکیک علم از اخلاق و دین در اندیشه‌ی او با کلیت فلسفه‌اش در تضاد است. در این مسیر ابتدا به بررسی جایگاه غریزه در استدلال و نیز مفهوم خودکنترلی به‌عنوان روش کنترل‌گر تحقیق پرداختیم. نشان دادیم که غریزه نزد پیرس پایه‌ی تمام استدلال و تفکر است؛ اما غریزه به‌تنهایی کافی نیست و باید توسط اصولی کنترل شود. اصل کنترل‌گر تحقیق، اصلی اخلاقی است؛ و ازآنجاکه اخلاق نیز در نظرگاه پیرس مبتنی بر زیبایی‌شناسی است، دیگر مرزی بین این سه حوزه نمی‌ماند. مفهوم کلیدی دیگر در فلسفه پیرس، آگاپیسم (عشق تکاملی) است که بر اساس آن جهان از طریق نیروی عشق پیش رانده و هماهنگ می‌شود. پیرس جهان را کلیتی به‌هم‌پیوسته می‌داند که در آن تمایز بین ذهن و ماده، عقل و احساس و نفس و بدن ناممکن است. درنهایت به تحلیل این موضوع پرداختیم که اگرچه روش‌شناسی پیرس به‌شکل معقولی اخلاق و زیبایی‌شناسی را در روش علمی می‌پذیرد، اما پذیرفتن مفاهیمی مانند عشق تکاملی، متافیزیکی را به فلسفه‌ی او وارد می‌کند که پذیرفتنی نیست.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

From Pragmatism to Evolutionary Love: The Role of Ethics and Religion in the Philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ghasem Pourhasan
  • Arvin Moradi

allameh tabataba'i university

چکیده [English]

Introduction

Peirce offers conflicting perspectives on the relationship between science, ethics, and religion. On one hand, he considers ethics and religion to be vital realms that can only be grasped through inner feeling and instinct; on the other hand, he occasionally adopts views that run counter to this approach. Ultimately, Peirce argues that logic is founded upon ethics, and ethics, in turn, is based on aesthetics. This paper examines the internal inconsistencies within Peirce’s philosophy, demonstrating that his attempt to separate science from ethics and religion is at odds with the overall coherence of his thought. In our analysis, we first explore the role of instinct in reasoning, alongside the concept of self-control as the guiding principle of inquiry. We show that, for Peirce, instinct forms the foundation of all reasoning and thought. However, instinct alone is insufficient—it must be regulated by certain principles. The principle governing inquiry is essentially ethical, and since, in Peirce’s view, ethics is grounded in aesthetics, the traditional boundaries between these three domains ultimately vanish. Moreover, two additional key concepts in Peirce’s philosophy—agapism and synechism—demonstrate how the world is harmonized by the force of love. Peirce envisions the universe as an interconnected whole in which distinctions between mind and matter, reason and emotion, and soul and body become untenable. Finally, we contend that although Peirce’s methodology reasonably incorporates ethics and aesthetics into scientific inquiry, his acceptance of ideas such as evolutionary love introduces a metaphysical element into his philosophy that ultimately undermines its rational foundation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Peirce
  • Ethics
  • Religion
  • Evolutionary Love
  • Logic
Cantens, B. (2006). Peirce on science and religion. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion (2006) 59:93–115.
Herdy, R. (2014). The Origin and Growth of Peirce’s Ethics: A Categorical Analysis. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy VI(2)
Holmes, L. (1966). Peirce on Self-Control. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Fall, 1966), pp. 113-130 Published by: Indiana University Press
Liszka, J. J. (2024). Morality and Ethics in the Work of Charles Peirce. Oxford University Press
Paavola, s. (2005). Peircean Abduction: Instinct or Inference? Semiotica, vol. 2005, no. 153, 2005, pp. 131-154.
Peirce, C. S. (1877). The Fixation of Belief. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 5, §§ 375–387). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1878). How to Make Our Ideas Clear. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 5, §§ 388–410). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1892). Karl Pearson, The Grammar of Science. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 8, §§ 95–138). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1892). The Order of Nature. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, §§ 395–427). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1893). A Religion of Science. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, §§ 1–22). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1893). Evolutionary Love. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, §§ 287–317). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1893). Reply to the Necessitarians. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, §§ 599–622). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1896). Lessons from the History of Science. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 1, §§ 42–69). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1898). Objective Logic. In A. W. Burks (Ed.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 4, §§ 60–79). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1898). The Continuum. In A. W. Burks (Ed.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, §§ 86–173). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1898). Vital Important Topics. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 1, §§ 311–350). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1902). Why Study Logic? In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 2, §§ 67–125). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1903). The Classification of the Sciences. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 1, §§ 1–7). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1903). The Three Kinds of Goodness. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, §§ 367–372). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1905). To William James. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 8, §§ 257–263). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1905). What Pragmatism Is. In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 5, §§ 8–24). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1908). A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God. In A. W. Burks (Ed.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, §§ 452–485). Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1908). Answers to questions concerning my belief in God. In The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 6, pp. 1-10). Harvard University Press.
Petry, E. S. (1992). The Origin and Development of Peirce's Concept of Self-Control. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, Vol. 28, No. 4 (Fall, 1992), pp. 667-690 Published by: Indiana University Press.
Potter, V. G. (1996). Peirce’s philosophical perspectives. Fordham University Press.
Ruse, M. (2019). Removing God from Biology. Printed in: Science without God? Rethinking the History of Scientific Naturalism. Edited by: Peter Harrison & John. H. Roberts. New York: Oxford University Press.
Waal, C. De. (2002). Introducing Pragmatism: A Tool for Rethinking Philosophy. Routledge: Taylor & Francis.