abbas asalem; shaker lavaei
Abstract
Free will as the most obvious human perception Has always faced with theoretical barriers. Science, Divine absolute power and will is one of the theological barriers. Hereditary and geographical factors are the scientific obstacles And necessitate causation as one of the branches of causality, ...
Read More
Free will as the most obvious human perception Has always faced with theoretical barriers. Science, Divine absolute power and will is one of the theological barriers. Hereditary and geographical factors are the scientific obstacles And necessitate causation as one of the branches of causality, is philosophical obstacles in agent cause cognition. Incompatibility in necessitate causation with cognition agent cause makes philosopher of different thoughts in traditional Islamic thought to answer them according to its intellectual foundation. Philosopher By accepting necessitate causation consider agent cause's will as the last component of perfect causation to justify optional action. But theologian deny necessitate causation and replace it with preponderance. then found essential possibility sufficient for optional actions.although they deny necessity that is derivated from necessitate causation. accordingly they are proven free will by denying necessity and sufficiency of preponderance .meanwhile Some Osolions of Shia that are known in the name of Naeeni's circle by their special theory,denied necessitate causation about agent cause but accepted necessitate causation for the rest of subjects. as a result they proved free will in agent cause. Following research not only will provide several answers but also tries to emphasize and highlight Osolions of Shia answers.
Mohammad Saeedimehr; Saeed Moghaddas
Volume 3, Issue 2 , October 2013, , Pages 99-123
Abstract
There are two main philosophical theories concerning the explanation of the relation between the causal necessity and the human freedom: 1. Compatibilism, which believes that the causal necessity is compatible with the human freedom, and incompatibilism, which sees these two incompatible. Allamah Tabatabaii ...
Read More
There are two main philosophical theories concerning the explanation of the relation between the causal necessity and the human freedom: 1. Compatibilism, which believes that the causal necessity is compatible with the human freedom, and incompatibilism, which sees these two incompatible. Allamah Tabatabaii proposes a specific version of compatibilism based on the notion of “comparative contingency” (al-imkan al-bilqiyas). According to his theory, the principle of causal necessity does not require more than that the human free action possess comparative contingency in comparison with the human agent and comparative necessity in comparison with its complex perfect cause (al-illah al-tammah). Moreover, the very nature of the human freedom is nothing but the action’s being contingent in relation to his agent. Therefore, the causal comparative necessity of the action in relation to its complex perfect cause does not contradict its being free. This compatibilist view has been challenged by some contemporary philosophers. In this paper we first give a short explication of Tbatabaii’s theory and then examine the arguments of its critics.
