Philosophy
Nafiseh Nojaba; Mahdi Qiasvand
Abstract
Abstract IntroductionContemporary models of "specific divine actions", mostly and regardless of differences, have shaken with three metaphysical commitments, namely "The incompatibility of the divine act and the act of nature", "God's non-intervention" and also "the prescriptiveness of the ...
Read More
Abstract IntroductionContemporary models of "specific divine actions", mostly and regardless of differences, have shaken with three metaphysical commitments, namely "The incompatibility of the divine act and the act of nature", "God's non-intervention" and also "the prescriptiveness of the laws of nature". What the following paper examines among these assumptions, is the first commitment or assumption. Neo-Thomism poses a serious challenge to the premises of incompatibilism within the frame of contemporary scientific theories and the only solution is to present alternative model. Nevertheless, the duality of nature and the supernatural as a common facet of compatibilism and incompatibilism is a berrier to both models providing a plausible explanation. Although, neo-Thomism s argument about longitudinal God–nature relationship fails to meet all expectations and they are faced with the dilemma between Deism and the denial of non-divine agency. Breaking the ontological boundaries between nature and the supernatural, there seem to be a possible solution to the dilemma. It seems monistic approach of Sadra developed two systems of unity “Tashkiky” and “Shakhsi” can be a solution to this problem. Thus, this essay examines Sadra argument to address the problem arised by “compatibilism” approach. MethodThis article is written in a descriptive-analytical method based on Mulla Sadra's principles.Results and DiscussionIn what follows, to address the issue by relying on Sadra s argument, firstly, double causality, causal closure and the difficulty of explanation of the supernatural effect on nature which makes difficult to explain “special divine action” in the frame of “compatibilism” approach, will be analysed. Sadra theory and Thomistic view have tried to solve the problem through rejecting causal duality, that is, they deny the adequacy of physical causes. The possibility of the supernatural effect on nature by excluding the ontological aspects between them is one of the significant components provided by this paper. Given the key role of the concept of “existence” and “essence” in Sadra and Thomistic view in explanation of the supernatural and nature, by appealing to different versions of Sadra s argument about “Asalat al-wujud” and Thomistic view, analysis of the relationships between these two concepts has been done. Finally, it is argued that the dualistic approach of Thomistic view and one of the version of “Asalat al-wujud” which is the identity of “existence” and “essence” fail to prove the possibility of the effect of the supernatural on nature. However, there are two other versions of “Asala al-wujud” can provide the solution to this problem.ConclusionWhat is suggested in this paper is only to show the power of Sadra s theory in breaking of the ontological boundaries between nature and Supernatural. Even two systems of “tashkiky unity” and “shakhsi unity” support this possibility. To solve the problem of “special divine action” through the breaking of the ontological aspects requires to be committed to components such as, the adequacy of the natural sciences, the laws of nature and noninterventionism commitment.
