نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری فلسفه و کلام اسلامی، دانشکده حقوق، الاهیات و علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
2 استاد مدعو دانشکده حقوق، الاهیات و علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
3 استادیار گروه فلسفه، دانشکده حقوق، الاهیات و علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
In this article, after a brief explanation of some key terms, one of Avicenna's reasons for the oldness of the natural world and Ghazali's criticisms of him are examined and analyzed, and in some cases, Mulla Sadra's comments in agreement with Avicenna are mentioned. Furthermore, the problems of each point of view are stated separately and the limits of each view's defense of its own theory are pointed out and judged. In Avicenna's argument, two rules are used, one related to philosophical public affairs and the other belonging to the realm of philosophical theology. In the analysis and explanation of the arguments of each side, the conclusion has been reached that the main problem is the issue of the supreme will, and the key to solving the problem is understanding the nature of the will of the Necessary Being. For this purpose, we presented Avicenna's and Ghazali's views on this matter and tried to reveal the correct and acceptable opinion on the will of the Necessary Being, and the oldness or creation of the natural world, although the effort failed. Finally, an opinion of the early philosophers, from Avicenna to Sabzewari, regarding the unity of knowledge, will, and action in the Necessary Being is proposed. The final result, with these limits of reason, is the incompleteness of all theories about the will of the Necessary Being and the temporary preference of the philosophers' theory about the oldness of the world.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)