جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « قاعده زرین » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Moral relativism is considered as one of the most important obstacles to rely on global ethics as a prerequisite for the peaceful coexistence of followers of religions. According to relativists, moral absolutism is a good platform for promoting violence and intolerance. This article seeks to analyze the claims of relativism and moral absolutism and to determine the relationship between each and the principle of orbit. In this article, while distinguishing between cultural relativism and moral relativity, it is shown that cultural relativism will not be an obstacle to the realization of global ethics; Because by recognizing it and at the same time believing in moral absolutism, the necessary ground can be provided for the realization of global ethics. By accepting the principle of cultural relativity, it is possible to emphasize some common principles between different cultures - while preserving cultural diversity - one of the most prominent of which is the "golden rule". This study claims that global ethics as well as the peaceful coexistence of religions can be achieved based on the framework of moral commonalities, including the "golden rule", because the closeness of religious people passes through the lens of morality - not ideological commonalities. In the end, it is suggested that the coexistence between religions be pursued by finding moral commonalities - instead of common ideological ones.

Global ethics is a need reminded to different researchers by the phenomenon of globalization. Meanwhile some scholars like the Catholic theologian Leonard Swidler seek to present the principles of the global ethics based on the common grounds of the religions (ecumenism). The current study has been conducted using a library-based analytic method in order to evaluate Swidler’s project of global ethics. To this end, the idea of the unity of religions is outlined and then Swidler’s theoretical foundations in his global ethics project as well as the principles presented by him in his second declaration are discussed. Finally, his project is criticized in the light of the presented principles and foundations and the following results are drawn: Swidler’s project of global ethics is of such advantages as paying attention to the responsibilities along with the rights, and the principles of human relations with the environment. Moreover, Swidler’s idea is significant in view of its being grounded in the effective interreligious dialogue as well as highlighting the role of religion in the global ethics. But his focus on the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and his failure of explication of its relation with the common ethics of religions have caused him to get distanced from the ideal of unity of religions in his second declaration.

Collecting data in the form of databases is one of the new methods that has been growing with the advancement of information technology. The use of databases in management and policy-making has created challenges in areas such as privacy breaches and compliance with accepted ethical norms. The increasing use of databases in public and private organizations in Iran has introduced new ethical and legal dimensions that need to be discussed and considered. The purpose of this study in the first place is to prove the immorality of using data without obtaining the consent of the data owner in the light of the golden rule of ethics. In the next step, we will try to present proposals for the current situation by stating the legal position of the European Union and the legal gaps in the Iranian legal system.

In order to avoid logical contradiction, individualschr('39') data should be used only by considering the principles governing the use of data and the element of satisfaction should be considered. In order to formulate a legal system to strengthen ethical norms in this field, by studying the legal regime governing data protection in the European Union, some shortcomings of the Iranian legal system in the field of legislation will be identified and solutions to improve it have been proposed.

In a general classification, the theories of normative ethics are divided into norm-based (foundationalism) and practice-based (particularism)theories. According to the norm-based theories, a general norm or a multiple of them should be used to judge the ethical truth of an act. Norm-based theories are either multi-norm or single-norm theories. Single-normative theories try to find a single abstractive norm to recognize all ethical duties. Maybe the most popular single-normative theory is Kant's theory. Kant's most popular interpretation of the categorical imperative is the rule of universalizability. I will compare Kant's theory of universalizability with Golden's rule. In this research I have used librarian research methods and content-analysis method. The result of this comparison is that each of the two norms are preferred over the other in some aspects but in general, the Golden rule is more sufficient and efficient compared with the universalizability rule of kant.

"What you like upon yourself, like upon others." The proposition in Ethics is known Golden Rule(GR). It seems that conceptual and practical difficulties of GR go back to the lack of clarity of its content. Conceptual and propositional analyz of GR shows the important components this Rule as follows: "self", "other", "Likes" and "what"(in some versions like above) each contain difficulties that faced with doubt, in the beginning, possible of understand and practice to GR. propositional analysis of Rule and defects pertaining to it are related to components of GR. In this article, we, by focus on GR's content, show that egoism, cultural relativism, different preferences in likes and dislikes and being numerous actions in the practical facing to others, none of them does not hurt to rule. So it might rational conception of it and practice to it.

Self-Sacrifice is a consequential theories of normative ethics; as is viewed in the theory, willing most good for others, free from one`s own interests, which views the most good for others as the basis for ethical action. Egoists viewing an egoistic nature for man, have denied human non-egoistic tendencies and some non egoists paying no attention to man`s natural love to himself/herself, give an irrational picture of it. This paper has intended to present a reasonable of the theory on the basis of Quran and reason. As is understood, human tendency is not limted to selfishness; rather, psychologically viewed, man has a tendency to like others. In Quranic ethics, man has been taught to pay attention to all interests all men including himself/herself and others. One, therefor, should in some cases leave one`s interest for others` interest. As is known, though Quranic emphasis on non-egoist actions leads us to their possibility and goodness, one may not infere that this normative theory is all what presented in Quranic. Presenting Quranic ethical theory needs a full study.

On the one hand, there are a lot of ongoing disputes in the realm of ethics and, on the other hand, it is very crucial for us to reach consensus over the issue of ethics. Harry J. Gensler tries to recognize rational patterns in our ethical thinking, modeling it after formal logic, and find formal principles in ethics to make a plan for moral rationality and open a way toward this common ground. But it seems to me that this attempt is not successful. Firstly, it is not plausible for us to infer the Golden Rule (GR) from a set of formal principles derived from pure (a priori) reason and thereby is not acceptable for all. Secondly, no version of GR is perfect, each one coming with its own potential defects. And thirdly, Gensler’s discussion does not make GR more efficient in solving major disagreements in ethics. GR is absolutely essential in ethics, but it comes with all the vagueness that accompanies it, through which disagreements become possible.

The ethical teaching stating “treat other people in the same way in which you would like them to treat you” has been known as “equity” in Islam and “the Golden Rule” in the contemporary ethical systems. Despite of semantic similarity and pervasiveness of these two concepts in all domains of human behavior, there are ambiguities in regard to some aspects of the subject and its general scheme on the one hand, and on the other hand some conflicts and misunderstandings can be observed being still taken into account by the contemporary ethical system. Analysis of the findings suggest that the concept of “equity” is overlapped with “the Golden Rule” and having a systemic analysis on the common meaning of both i.e. having reasonable and legitimate expectations from self and others in the cases of being in similar assumed situations, an appropriate behavioral pattern can be proposed for individual and social lives.

This paper includes a conceptual analysis from the viewpoint of seven live religions of the world (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddha, Hindu, Confucius, and Zoroastrianism) about the Golden Rule. According to the religions, this rule includes features such as “self”, “otherness” and “approbation” and a look upon interpersonal relations indicate that the religious people of all religions are requested to practice the same. Seeing oneself in the existence status of otherness or observing the behavior of oneself from another perspective is the favorable attitudes adopted by the religions. Considering different factors of this rule in religions’ records especially the factor of “otherness” convey the fact that religions do not recommend to observe the golden rule only against coreligionists but regardless of any specific religion, it is recommended to be practiced as a universal rule.