جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « فضیلت اخلاقی » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

This paper explores the similarities and differences in Mencius' and Farabi's perspectives on moral virtue. Influenced by aspects of moral philosophy and the ideas of Aristotle and Plato, the study presents a theoretical framework that highlights a shared approach to moral virtue and naturalism. While both philosophers embrace moral virtue, Mencius focuses on practical and partial virtues, whereas Farabi emphasizes theoretical, intellectual, and general virtues. This distinction results in several differences between their viewpoints. Mencius regards nature as the comprehensive source of ethics, emphasizing the inherent goodness of human nature. On the other hand, Farabi proposes the role of habit and practice in shaping morality. Farabi contends that morality is predominantly acquired, in contrast to Mencius, who emphasizes its innate nature. Additionally, Farabi suggests that an individual can elevate morality through habituation, a perspective not shared by Mencius.

Gratitude is considered equivalent to faith in the Quran by Izutsu. Reinhart thinks that it is a moral requirement to be grateful because it contrasts with ingratitude (kufr) in the Quran. Whereas there are certain problems with their claims, grounds, and reasons, the contrast between gratitude and ingratitude in the Quran might suggest that there is a connection between gratitude and faith, and faith is a moral virtue. In an analysis of the term ‘gratitude’ as opposed to ingratitude in the Quran and according to the points made by Muslim commentators and thinkers, being grateful to the good of this world requires man to recognize the benefactor and to use bounties in the divinely desired way; and that is the result of faith A person must also take advantage of the guidance given by God and have faith in Him in order to be grateful for being guided to religion. The act of denying God is an act of ungratefulness in the face of blessings that cannot be denied. The method of this research is descriptive-analytical.

Gentleness, ease and compromise with others cause the proper development of human emotions and in religious texts it is referred to as "tolerance". This moral virtue has a high importance and position among different schools and religious teachings, so the main question in this study was how the relationship between the moral virtues of tolerance in the school of liberalism with this concept can be established among religious modernists in Iran?

In line with the purpose of the study, it was assumed that the frameworks and intellectual indicators of Iranian religious modernists have deep differences in the field of values ​​and moral education with liberal ideas. Studies have shown that this value has the same meaning in the two schools. But there is also a subtle difference in this value. If tolerance is used as a moral attribute to mean easy-going, tolerance, chivalry, foresight and freedom, it is approved by Islam. But tolerance means complete indifference to the moral beliefs and behaviors of different individuals and groups leading to moral relativity. Accordingly, anyone can have any kind of moral beliefs and behavior, and others should not only not be bothered, but should advise and encourage diversity and difference.

Philosophers consider social justice as a moral virtue. Of course, social justice is not a virtue along with other moral virtues, but all virtue. In societies, women generally feel less social justice. Therefore, the present study was designed to investigate the factors affecting the success of women entrepreneurship with a moderating role in social justice.

The present study is in the field of applied research in terms of purpose and is based on the nature of a descriptive-survey research and the type of method is qualitative-quantitative (mixed). In the qualitative part, content analysis method was used. The community included banking industry experts with entrepreneurial experience, of whom 20 were selected by snowball method as a sample. The interview tool was then the data were sifted using the Delphi technique. In the quantitative part, the descriptive-correlation method was used. The population consisted of female employees of state-owned banks in Mazandaran province, of which 226 were selected as the sample using the available sampling method. The tool of the Delphi questionnaire was the qualitative section. Finally, the data were analyzed by exploratory factor analysis and structural equations. The software used in this study was SPSS-LISREL.

The results of the research showed that effective factors had 12 dimensions that were placed in three groups of behavioral, organizational and network factors, social justice is also in 4 dimensions. These factors are positively and significantly related to the success of women entrepreneurship in state-owned banks, although behavioral factors show a higher positive relationship. Also, different dimensions of social justice moderate the effect of different factors on the success of women entrepreneurship in state-owned banks.

A set of behavioral, organizational and networking factors mediated by social justice as a moral virtue that includes components such as trust and security, equality, meritocracy and the rule of law can affect the success of women entrepreneurship.

The nature of virtue is a subject that has been a source of philosophical reflection for philosophers since the time of Aristotle. Aristotle is the first thinker who gave a classical explanation of virtue. In Aristotle's thought, virtue is a characteristic trait that lies in the middle. Analyzing the human soul, he divides virtue into two types, moral and rational. On the other hand, Linda Zagzebski, an eminent American philosopher who is among the neo-Aristoteans, insists that moral concepts are ultimately derived from the concept of virtue. And therefore, he tries his best to provide a precise definition of the nature of virtue and its characteristics. In this article, after revealing the position of both philosophers regarding the nature of virtue, by comparing and revealing points of commonality and difference, we will show how and why these two philosophers differ in defining the nature and division of virtue.

Gratitude as a moral virtue not only plays a very important role in mental health of humans, but also appreciates the repetition, abundance and continuity of their desirable behaviors, and it gives meaning to social life and human society. The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of mediator of academic stress and academic self-efficacy in the relationship between personality traits and gratitude.

The research, application and method of collecting and analyzing its data are descriptive and correlational. The research community is the second-grade secondary school students of Yazd, of which 474 students (186 boys and 288 girls) were selected by cluster random sampling method. The questionnaire was filled out by a multi-component gratitude scale, a short form of a five-factor questionnaire, a questionnaire of academic stress and an academic self-efficacy questionnaire. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling.

The results showed that among the personality traits, consistency, extroversion and openness to experience directly and task-oriented, openness to experience and psychosocialism indirectly and with mediating stress academic and academic self-efficacy can anticipate gratitude.

The result is that personality traits can reduce the academic stress of individuals and low-stressed individuals in coping with the problems of self-efficacy. In such a situation, students are on the path to becoming more exalted.

Aristotle defines happiness as virtuous activity in both Nicomachean Ethics and Eudemian Ethics. By his discussing on psychology and considering the virtues of the parts of the soul, he attempts to attain the final definition of “happiness” and “the virtuous activity”. His research in Nicomachean Ethics leads to the conclusion that ultimate happiness is contemplation. But in Eudemian Ethics happiness is defined as “the activity of a complete life in accordance with complete virtue”. In other words, in Eudemian Ethics happiness contains all the virtues, including contemplation and the moral virtues. These two apparently different definitions of the “happiness” show that moral virtue does not have the same status in those two ethical treatises. In this paper, we first express Aristotle's ethical thought in both treatises, and then we show that Aristotle considers moral virtue, at the end of the Nicomachian Ethics, as a necessary condition for happiness and contemplation, but in the Eudemian Ethics, he considers the moral virtue together with contemplation as the constituents of happiness. This difference on the stutus of moral virtue in the happiness issues from Aristotle's different viewpoints on the life of happy man in the Nicomachean Ethics and the Eudemian Ethics. In the first treatise, Aristotle concerns with human beings in “the domain of God-like activity”, but in the second treatise, he concerns with human being in “the domain of human activity”.

The early writings of Plato center based on a kind of knowledge which its object is moral virtues. According to the epistemology of these writings, theory is tied up with practice; since in its perspective, being aware of the moral virtue makes one moral and being ignorance of it causes immorality. Human’s will is subordinate to knowledge as well, so that when someone knows the goodness, she/he wants it; therefore, no one does wrong willingly. Furthermore, human’s prosperity depends on knowledge; for worldly enjoyments are good only if they are used in the right way, and it is knowledge that shows the right use of them. Even moral virtues without knowledge are not true ones. Thus, knowledge is the principal condition of attaining virtue and prosperity. In the above-mentioned writings, Socratic method of dialectic is examined, and it is concluded that this method hardly ends up in knowledge. However, the way of dialectic makes philosopher’s life and existence inseparable form her/his philosophy.

The relation of virtues with each other is among the controversial issues about virtues that was firstly dealt with by Socrates and Plato and they proposed the theory of uniqueness of virtue. Aristotle did not accept this theory and divided virtues into two rational and ethical groups. He has mostly dealt with ethical virtue and has provided no clear response to this question that what relation is between rational and ethical virtues. Farabi and Zagzebeski do not accept the theory of uniqueness of virtue and they believe that rational virtues are different from ethical ones. In response to the relation between virtues¡ Farabi and Zagzebeski have proposed priority and posteriority¡ and subset theories respectively. The analysis that Farabi and Zagzebeski propose from the relation between virtues is finally another version of uniqueness of virtues.

Zagzebski is a peeoner of virtue epistemology. She reject the claim of Aristotel about distinction between intellectual virtue and moral virtue. Zagzebski argue that an intellectual virtue dose not differ from certain moral virtues any more then one moral virtue differs from another. She argue that intellectual virtue are a kind of moral virtues and subset of It. only reason fore distinguish virtue from each other is motivation component. Each of virtue have fundamental motivation that is different from others. This article explor and critic Zagzebski's view distinction between virtues with descriptive and analysis of content method.

Terence Irwin argues that Aquinas answered a question that Aristotle had raised buthad not answered. The question is if there is any relation between intellectual virtuesand moral virtues. The answer is yes, moral virtues direct intellectual virtues toattain the final end. Moral virtues show in what areas one should think, how muchother things should be attended to, and how much one should spend time forintellectual issues. Aquinas believes in infused virtues in addition to moral virtuesand those especially charity have central place in aforementioned directing role. Weargue firstly that Aristotle also had answered the question. Secondly, there is noessential difference between intellectual virtues and moral virtues. Thirdly, there isone single virtue that functions in both intellectual and moral matters. And fourthly,the root of difficulties is in ethical naturalism of Aquinas following Aristotle.