abdol rasoul kashfi; matin tayefehrostami
Volume 6, Issue 3 , October 2017, , Pages 75-100
Abstract
Abstract
According to the theological fatalism, future matters are necessary and this necessity makes them unalterable; so, human beings are not able to make the future by their free will and this is incompatible with human freedom.
Based on theological fatalism, there are four alternatives: ...
Read More
Abstract
According to the theological fatalism, future matters are necessary and this necessity makes them unalterable; so, human beings are not able to make the future by their free will and this is incompatible with human freedom.
Based on theological fatalism, there are four alternatives: first, accepting divine foreknowledge and denying human freedom, which is in fact affirming theological fatalism; second, accepting human freedom and rejecting divine foreknowledge; third, accepting both; and fourth, refusing both.
Allameh Tabatabaei and William Craig accept the compatibility between divine foreknowledge and human freedom; consequently both thinkers believe that divine knowledge about human free actions is due to His knowledge of conditions and properties of the action. Thus, God knows what the subject will freely do in any circumstance.
Hossein Mohammadi; Abd-al-Rasoul Kashfi; Hassan Ebrahimi
Volume 5, Issue 1 , October 2014, , Pages 109-131
Abstract
One of the important issues in philosophy of mind is mind-body relationship. In this regard, there are two views: Monism and Dualism. Based on Dualism, human beings have two aspects: physical body and immaterial mind; on the contrary Monism holds that there is only one kind of ultimate substance by which ...
Read More
One of the important issues in philosophy of mind is mind-body relationship. In this regard, there are two views: Monism and Dualism. Based on Dualism, human beings have two aspects: physical body and immaterial mind; on the contrary Monism holds that there is only one kind of ultimate substance by which the human beings are constituted.
Though Mullasadra and John Hick, from two different philosophical traditions, both believe in the two aspects, as this article wants to prove, Mullasadra’s view is monistic, however not in its prominent meaning in philosophy of mind; his view is a novel one based on his philosophical views. John Hick is a substantial dualist. He advocates his view at the cost of rejection of mind-brain identity theory and also epiphenomenalism. Nevertheless, aside his view on mind-body relationship, most of his theories are similar to Mullasadra’s theory, namely, believing in two different aspects for human beings, mind emergence procedure, mind immateriality, human physical initial creation, interrelation of mind and body, and their effects on each other