Philosophy of religion
Year:2015 | Volume:12 | Issue:3|Papers Count:7

The relationship between ethics and religion, is an issue that could be considered in all the history of philosophy and in all systems of philosophy. But, following the discussions that Kant has raised about practical reason and it's separation from pure reason, all the topics that until that time used to discuss in theoretical reason, especially the issues like metaphysic and theology, find their way into practical reason and then, the relationship between ethics and religion has totally changed. Despite the fact that Kant denies all the arguments for the existence of God, but he believes that morality implies a profound belief in God. After Kant, German idealist's scholars tried to eliminate the gap between practical and theoretical reason; so they took new steps with regard to the achievements of Kant. This process, especially has investigated by Hegel Significantly. Hegel, as the most influential German idealistic figure, proposed the notion of "Das Absolute" against separation of subject and object. According to him, religion could be one of the fields of knowledge and Absolute could manifest itself in it. Moreover, it is possible for theoretical reason to reveal from God's attributes and essence. Thus, according to Hegel, first of all there is no need to Kant's moral argument for the existence of God; and on the other hand, Kant's ethical principles for proving the existence of God by practical reason seems insufficient.

The recognition of divine's attributes and its interpretation, are represented in the context of different thoughts and in various forms. Sadr-ul-Mote'allehin, has founded his philosophical thoughts on the idea of "existential gradation" that refers to Hierarchical degree of existence manifestations. The present study is going to according to a descriptive-analysis method in Mulla Sadra's thought, gives a new analytic from semanticist of divine attributes. By following the manner of division of the levels of existence manifestations near theosophists, He explains existential orders in three stages: essence, first determinacy, and second determinacy. The stage of essence is vacuity of all attributive determinations and impossibility of speaking about God. First determinacy, is the reference of attributes of incomparability. And second determinacy, that of attributes of similarity. Essence, or permanent object is appearance of divine attributes, which are the general meaning of existence in the world. Recognition of divine attributes by human being is achieved only through acknowledgement of such permanent object which, as suggested by Mulla Sadr, is the subject of general particles.

By comparison of Mula Sadra's epistemological theory with virtual epistemological theories of Zagzebski and Plantinga, we could conclude that the former’s theory can be categorized as a virtual epistemology. On the other hand Plantinga believes in the virtue of faculties of generative; and Zagzebski believes in function of intellectual power in forming episteme.In fact, both of them believe in some aspects of the elements that effect on formation and development of belief. So none of the above mentioned theories are free from objection. But Mula Sadra, on the other hand, in his epistemological thought believes in influence of moral faculties function on intellectual faculties, and their interactive function in forming belief and truth conductivity process. Plantinga argues that only the generating faculties of belief could form beliefs; while Zagzebski and Mula Sadra also argue that moral faculties prepare the ground for formation of true beliefs, but they believe this is ethical faculties that provide a suitable context for true belief. Moreover, Mula Sadra proposes reliability and truth conductivity processes of revelation and inspiration as two other processes that form reliable and true beliefs.

One of the critiques that most of the time was raised by some intellectuals and defenders of separation of religion and state, is that "if it was possible for religion to rule over the society, it should be happened during the long history of prophetic religions, or at the time when Shiite Imams ruled over the society". This intellectuals, with neglecting from content of Quran verses and great heritage of Shiite Hadith, that emphasis on realization of divine spiritual State in some parts of this worldly life, has totally denied the existence of such a States and believe in separation of State and religion. In the present paper, with restricting the scope of our inquiry to the time of Imam Ali (and especially with a view to Nahj-al-Balagheh), and with pathology and analysis of that time from different aspects, we will take the barriers and obstacles of realization of religious State into consideration. With a profound view to the time of Imam Ali's life, we realize that there were many reasons for secularization of society at that time, i.e: loving the material world, ignorance, lack of insight, neglecting from Islamic rules and its commands and deprivations, and etc. all of these, were the main barriers that made it impossible for religious leaders to form a religious State.

Toleration is a key virtue in most religions and cultures which has received increasing attention from researchers in the past one hundred years. Despite massive efforts to clarify its conceptual meaning, it seems that no satisfactory result has obtained yet. Application of this term in different methodologies, views, schools of thought, and approaches by different people as well as its use in different scientific fields such as philosophy, ethics, religion, social sciences, politics, psychology, and history on one hand, and its imprecise and indiscriminate application in the linguistics domain in the form of equivocation and content participation on the other hand, have brought about ambiguity in its meaning and transmission, in a way that some have suggested that the term is paradoxical. Nonetheless, as a major concept, toleration presents a spectrum of methods of behaving against the opposite thoughts. It starts from endurance and leads to permissiveness in the mystic knowledge domain. In other words, the relationship between toleration and permissiveness is that of general to specific rather than equality or distinction. The religious outcomes of this study include the conceptual clarification of the two foregoing terms and familiarity with the conditions and problems that exist in them in the traditional and modern paradigms. Moreover, the study will set the grounds for classification and categorization of the toleration-oriented and permissiveness -oriented teachings in the Islamic mysticism.

The concept of “infinite essence” that is both philosophically and theologically important, has passed many different evolutions in western history of thought. Pre-Socratic has evaluated it in two different ways. Anaximander and Melisus agree that the principle substance is infinite and divine, but neither absolutely transcendent nor anthropomorphic. The infinite is the phusis in its substantial aspect. On the other hand, many ancient Greek philosophers, especially Plato and Aristotle, think that the perfect thing cannot be infinite, because according to them, the infinite is both ontologically and epistemologically indeterminate. But Philo, on the contrary, under the influence of Jewish tradition, set the infinity and perfection together as attributes of God; and Christian theologians in agreement with him, considered God as infinite and transcendent being who is beyond of nature. In last ages of mediaeval period, some of the Christians changed their attitude toward transcendence and considered God as immanent being, but yet person. By the outset of the modern age, Descartes accepted the idea of infinite, transcendent and personal God, and declared that perfection and infinity can be taken together as attributes of divine being.

Knowledge is one of the most important achievements of human being in confrontation with phenomena and facts which he acquires through his cognitive faculties. Throughout the history of philosophy, there was always this confusion that whether our beliefs are influenced by non-epistemic areas and external elements or not; and if so, is it epistemologically acceptable and intelligible or the agent should avoid these effects. Zagzebski, one of the modern epistemologists, who is known often by his theory of “virtue epistemology”. In the process of theorizing, he speaks of non-epistemic elements as the foundations of knowledge. Feelings and emotions, virtues and vices, human will and social backgrounds are some of the most important elements which she mentions and constructs her theory on them.This article will analyze these elements and process of their impacts on formation of knowledge.