Comparative analysis of the methodology of the ethical arguments of Shahid Motahari and Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi

Some realists consider moral judgments to be reasonable. According to this view, ethical arguments play an important role in determining the direction of moral decisions and distinguishing between good and bad; Hence, their degree of persuasion and credibility will have a direct effect on the acceptance of the moral agent. therefore, it is necessary to examine the arguments both in terms of substance and form. The closer the arguments are to the analogy of the argument, the more certain they are. Thus, the methodology of the ethical arguments of different viewpoints and scholars can assess the value of the moral judgments provided by them. In this study, in order to identify the validity of the moral precepts of Shahid Motahari and Ayatollah Mesbah, as two realistic Muslim thinkers, we intend to deal with the methodology of their ethical arguments. In this regard, the method of comparative analysis was used. The obtained results show that the moral reasoning of both professors is conjunctive analogy in terms of form and obvious Nonethical propositions in terms of matter. Nevertheless, Master Mesbah's argument is superior to Master Motahhari's moral argument in terms of transparency and achieving sound results.