جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « Josiah Royce » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

The Relation between Practical Reason and Morality in Robert Adams, Ash'arism, and Josiah Royce Abstract: Robert Adams considers practical reason and morality to be dependent on reason but ultimately rooted in religion. He is influenced by the Ash'ari theory of divine command and the theory of acquisition. He believes that morality depends on religion and that the ultimate source of morality is God. However, he also believes that the basis of his practical reason is rational. Josiah Royce, on the other hand, believes in ethical idealism and establishes a meaningful relationship between ontology, ethics, idealism, and monotheistic theology. Royce's ethical idealism does not, like Ghazali, make morality dependent on a particular religion, nor does it separate religion and morality from each other. He describes humans as transcendental beings with a prior knowledge of moral principles. Therefore, the conformity of religion and morality will not have a posteriori and historical aspect but will have a metaphysical and ontological basis. Adams, regardless of giving priority to reason and free will, bases his beliefs on the principle of a "sense of duty" towards divine commands and having a conscience. However, according to the Ash'ari view of "divine command" and the "theory of acquisition," whatever the divine being deems permissible or forbids is considered right and wrong, respectively. Whatever the divine being commands is obligatory. Therefore, the validity and truth of every action must be judged according to the criteria of the Sharia, and humans are merely the acquirers of the commands of the divine being and the Sharia. However, the common ground between Adams and the Ash'arites is that they both consider happiness and all moral actions to be dependent on religion.

AbstractIn this article, by referring to some of Plato's most important works, we explain his view on evil. Due to the fact that he considers sensations to be a weak representation of immutable truths, the basis of this view is in the Neoplatonic tradition that evil has a non-existent aspect. This attitude is far from a realistic approach to life, because the life of living beings in general and the life of man in particular, is faced with various types of metaphysical evil, and man, as a being with authority, is also subject to or the origin of moral evil. Although based on specific reading, one can look for the plan of the world like Plato in the light of his encounter with the death of Socrates and trying to escape from it, because of the ruling attitude of the ancient world which is based on the class system, Plato also has an elitist approach and instead ofemphasizingindividual responsibilities, he points to the establishment of philosophers as a model of intellectual celibacy and moral virtues in society. This is while in modern society where individual values are important, a reliable connection is established between the issue of evil and social responsibility. By referring to the philosophy of Josiah Royce, who is also an idealist thinker like Plato, we can understand that contemporary idealism cannot ignore the reality of evil in the same optimistic and holistic view of the world. Royce looks at human sufferings realistically and emphasizes a   Evil and Social Responsibility: Investigating the Requisties of Platonic Idealism and Josiah Royce's Idealistic Theresponsible approach to reduce suffering and eliminate social shortcomings according to his theoretical foundations.

In this article, by referring to the foundations of Royce's thought, his theology is explained and analyzed. Influenced, on the one hand, by personal idealism, Royce construes man as a part of cosmic process that achieves the goals of living and objective truth (God), and on the other hand, points out that every human being has his own unique talent. Thus in spite of absolute idealism, he attaches importance to individual differences. In his view, idealism has the potential to provide a new interpretation of Christian theology; so it comes terms with the active life of contemporary man. In Royce's philosophy it is possible to provide a model for the interaction between science and religion; because he distinguishes the everyday sensory experience and organized scientific experience. He considers all possible and actual experiences as objects of the absolute divine mind that will be actualized by human’s scientific endeavor in the context of inventions and discoveries.  Royce even maintains that the loyal commitment of scientists and business owners to society as a kind of religious experience (in the broadest sense) and thereby offers a new image of the invisible church.

According to Ghazzali's theory of Divine Order, whatever God permits or forbids is respectively right and wrong, and whatsoever God command is obligatory. Therefore, the criterion of the correctness and inaccuracy of any act must be measured in terms of Divine order and forbidding. On the contrary, some Western thinkers defend the independence and self-sufficiency of morality and do not agree with ethics as being base on religion. As one of the contemporary theologians, Hans Kung, inspired by Kant's ethical philosophy, is seeking, along with a critical approach, to find common ground between religions and thus allow for peaceful coexistence between religions. Among the results of this discussion is the impossibility of universal morality in Ghazali's theory, because he based morality on historical religion and sees no room for the general principles of morality. Hans Kung also sees ethics as independent of religion and being of no celestial origin for moral principles; his view, therefore, lacks a credible metaphysical foundation to create an amoral relationship between morality and religion. When comparing the two Western scholars, we may say that Josaya`s idealist ethics is a good idea to justify global ethics in terms of the metaphysical relationship between religion and ethics.