جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « existential gradation » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

One of the most important arguments in proving God’s existence among the materialistic and the theists is the argument of Order that has been explained with various structures till now. Some of those arguments are based on arithmetic possibilities, which has been faced with serious criticism of the Muslim theologians and scholars and from the fans of Darwin’s Stochastic Evolution theory or simply the Evolution theory. This article by the use of arithmetic possibilities and designing a mathematical formula, in addition to responding to the critics, has criticized the Stochastic Evolution theory and random order in time. Accordingly it becomes clear that the series of events that lead to a particular result or system over time would not happen in any given time span, and for the complicated order embedded within the creatures to be formed according to random events like none-targeted genetic mutation, there is not enough time. Hence the possibility of creation of the current system of the world by accident is impossible and an existence of a wise element for it is a necessity.

Mulla Sadra Shirazi, by his own principles like Fundamentality of existence, existential gradation and the unity of being, believes that love equals being and explains how the love penetrates in all particles of the universe. He maintains that love is divine nature of human existence and it is full of wisdom and expediency as he considered. Although sages and Gnostics before Mulla Sadra, have written a lot about love, but Mulla Sadra's Transcendent Philosophy, has opened a specific approach to the subject in question. Mulla Sadra’s transcendent wisdom is based on principles and fundamentals which are not regarded before him as the elements of philosophical system, so he has presented a new conversation. Fundamentality of existence, existential gradation, equivalence of being with knowledge and life, substantial motion, unity of intelligence and intelligible and copula being, are some of the fundamental principles of Sadra's wisdom. This paper will examine and discuss the position of these fundamentals and their vital influences on Mulla Sadra's knowledge of love.

Q24: 35 (known as the verse of the Light) is among the verses that have been interpreted by some philosophers, some of whom are Avicenna and Mulla Sadra. Avicenna suggests a purely philosophical interpretation and understands the analogies of the verse as the levels of theoretical reason. By contrast, based on the notions of principality and gradation of existence, Mulla Sadra tries to come up with a system of divine grace descent and adapts the analogies of the verse to this system. It is important that although Mulla Sadra tries to prove the existence of God as the Light through Peripatetic approaches, his exegesis of the verse preserves its mystical approach as well as its philosophical one.The difference in aims, attitudes, exegetical methods and the degree to which they consider the apparent meaning are the main factors which distinguish Avicenna from Mulla Sadra on the Exegesis of Q24: 35.

In the first place, the present paper scrutinizes corporeal resurrection philosophically from Mulla Sadra’s viewpoint as well as fundamental position of the principle of existential gradation. In this way, it is inferred that the principle has a fundamental position in all of the corporeal resurrection components including soul, imaginary body, imagination, and enjoyable and painful affaires so that without considering this principle, corporeal resurrection known by the philosopher will not be established. At the end, matching Mulla Sadra’s corporeal resurrection and the principle with verses and narrations, it is concluded that regarding resurrection discussion, three groups of verses and narrations are mainly involved and Mulla Sadra’s corporeal resurrection is retractable with all three groups.

The moral status of beings is an important discussion in moral philosophy and is nowadays being attended to from different aspects. Moral status denotes the very status which makes beings responsible. And as well, many theories have been presented on its limits and criteria. The most important theories related to this discussion are as follows: The theory of genetic humanity, with the criteria of ‘’ humane existence’’; the theory of moral agency, with the criteria of ‘’ moral agent’’; perception-center theory, with the criteria of ‘’ perceiving being’’; the theory of organic life, with the criteria of ‘’ living being’’; the theory of deep ecology, with the criteria of ‘’ the beings of the biosphere’’; the theory of foundation relation, with the criteria of ‘’a being possessing either social relationships or ecological ones’’. Based on the available theories, and as well, the expert Javadi Amoli’s works and views, the present paper seeks to introduce the criteria of ‘’ existence’’ as the minimum requirement of being’s moral status; and also, based on the existential gradation, it seeks to discuss and reach conclusion on the gradational nature of beings’ moral status. It appears that the limit of the moral status in this view is much extended. On the one hand, it encompasses human beings, and far superior, God and the angelic, and on the other hand, from an inferior position, it encompasses animals and even plants and in a mystical interpretation, all beings.

This essay wants to reply to one of the most important ontological problemes that the theory of existential gradation can justify numerical manyness of beinges or not? This research at the first step will show that the gradational relationship between two things logically dependes on vertical and casual linkage waist them. So that the gradational relevance is neccessarily vertical. And so horizontal gradation is paradoxical concept like «roundel square». Therefore realization of gradational respect among horizontal beinges is impossible. Thus the theory of existential gradation cant explain numerical multiplicity of the instances of a species. In the second stage of this essay we criticize and refuse the viewpoints of Allamehe Tabatabaei، Martyr Motahari and Javadi Amoli about the coherency among the horizontal manyness of objects and the theory of existential gradation.