مجله پژوهش های اخلاقی
سال چهارم شماره 2 (پیاپی 14، زمستان 1392)

According to traditions and Quranic verses, "man's attention to God's knowledge" has many good effects for him, among which moral effects seem more profound. "Attention to God's knowledge" not only results in "avoidance of vices" but also in" possession of virtues". "Avoidance of vices" means abstaining from sin, cruelty, whimsicality and the like. The Quranic verses and traditions refer to some of the more specific instances of these effects, such as avoiding meanness, backbiting, accusation, treason, self-glorification, and hypocrisy. There is a close relationship between this semantic field and some other semantic fields, such as the relationship between" the effects of attention to God's knowledge" and "effects of remembrance of God", which is "general and peculiar in some respects".

Islam puts great importance on animal's rights and doing justice towards them, considers these rights as "God's rights", and deems all people responsible for animals. One of most important rights of animals is their right of maintenance which includes food, shelter and treatment. Any act which bothers animals physically and mentally and cause them suffering, such as beating, cauterizing, mutilating, overloading, overriding, milking with nails, and hurting at the time of slaughtering are forbidden, because animals have consciousness and feelings. These acts are considered satanic and bad, while friendly, honest and just treatment of animals is always emphasized. Furthermore, cursing, deceiving and separating animals from their foals are disfavored and forbidden, while sheltering harmless animals which seek shelter in man's house is favored. Animals should be utilized properly and their right of mating should not be violated. Therefore, emasculating animals and making them to fight each other is disfavored. According to the injunctions of Islam, we are obliged to preserve the rights of animals. The holy Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his progeny) used any occasion to elaborate on animal's rights and the ways of preserving them. In addition, Islamic texts use the term "divine reward" for observing the rights of animals and "divine chastisement" for violating their rights, and refer to other worldly and spiritual rewards. If men fail to observe the rights of animals they will commit sin and will be punished in the day of resurrection. Islam's attention to animals is general and includes those animals whose meat in forbidden to eat and those which are dying. In addition to referring to the rights of animals, Islam points to the reasons of injunctions related to animals.

Virtue-based ethics, which had been totally obsolete in modern times, was revived by some western thinkers including Iris Murdoch in the second half of 20th century. Of course, Murdoch's exposition of this type of ethics has unique aspects. Farabi's moral system is also considered as an instance of virtue-based moral system. The present paper seeks to compare the components of Farabi's moral systems with those of Iris Murdoch's system and examine their similarities and differences. It taken for granted that there are many similarities between these two systems, because Farabi's moral system is completely Aristotelian and Murdoch's system is to some extent Aristotelian and to some other extent Platonic. However, there are considerable differences between these systems. In fact, non-actualized critiques directed by philosopher like Farabi against a thinker like Murdoch are those critiques which a perfect Aristotelian can direct towards a thinker who integrates some Aristotelian components with some non- Aristotelian ones. The present paper examines these critiques. Comparing and contrasting these two systems is, in fact, a comparison between Aristotelian ethics and an instance of virtue-based ethics in 20th century and will greatly contribute to a better understanding of virtue-based ethics.

The problem of man's choice and free-will has always occupied man's mind. Its importance lies in its relationship with accountability and ethics, in such a way that the basis of man's responsibility and morality is the existence of choice and free-will in man. This problem can be studied from different aspects one of which is taking into consideration the nature of soul. The nature of soul or mind is discussed in both Islamic philosophy and western philosophy, particularly the philosophy of mind, which is considered a branch of analytical philosophy. In this regard, philosophers have greatly discussed the question whether soul is immaterial and non-physical or material and physical? The present paper seeks to investigate the position of choice and, consequently, moral responsibility according to these two theories about soul.

Forgiveness is one of the moral concepts, which is often proposed as a virtue by modern philosophy of ethics. In Greek and Roman moral thought, this concept was not discussed as a main virtue and Greeks did not regard it among four virtues. With the advent of Jesus Christ and emphasis put on man's sinfulness by Christianity, this virtue strengthened and gradually proposed as an important and serious virtue in modern and contemporary period. Under the influence of Christ's teachings and psychological trends, some emphasized on unconditioned forgiveness while others believed that unconditioned forgiveness can have many immoral consequences. Therefore, they issued philosophical and moral warnings. Confrontation between these trends caused different discussions, the most important of which was the question: what is conceptually meant by forgiveness and what is its nature? Thus moral, philosophical, theological, psychological, metaphysical, linguistic, biological, political and social dimensions of forgiveness were taken into consideration, and exploration on these dimensions contributed, to some extent, in elaborating this concept. The present paper reflects a part of these attempts to explain the nature and essence of forgiveness and seeks to contribute in elaborating on this concept by mainly using conceptual analysis and in the form of some independent points.

Nietzsche's philosophy may be regarded as the most all-inclusive and most ambiguous philosophy of history, of which different-and sometimes contradictory-understandings and interpretations are made. No doubt, however, ethics is the most important field on which Nietzsche has exerted influence. The consequence of his teachings in this field is the change of past generation's moral standards. Nietzsche claims that he intended a new type of ethics and calls it the ethics special for superhuman. The present paper tries to study Nietzsche's moral views based on the most coherent and justified interpretation and evaluate the criticisms directed against this interpretation and the scale of their correctness and incorrectness.

Mohammad 'Abed Al-Jaberi was one of the most famous thinkers in Arab world, who tried to solve cultural and political problems and crises of that world through providing new solutions. By writing the book Al-'Aql Al-Akhlaqi Al- Arabi (Arabic moral reason), he tried to analyze and criticize Iranian and Sufi heritage through a completely critical look. He concluded that all backwardness, miseries, and moral-value degradation in all Islamic societies were rooted in Ardshir's thoughts- the ethics of obedience- and that if Arab rulers make a mistake, they should not be reproached; rather, Ardshir and his thoughts should be reprehended. The present paper reviews many critiques directed against Al- Jaberis, some of which are as follows: ethnocentrism, irrelevant and widespread prejudgments, selective use of source and inability or access to different sources of each heritage.

The injunction of Jihad which is mentioned in several verses of the holy Quran has made some opponents of Islam to regard it a clear instance of bellicosity and violence, which is legislated with the aim of imposing beliefs on men. Explaining the view of the Quran about freedom of thought, the present paper examines Quranic verses of Jihad with regard to their historical context and occasions of revelation, and proves that Jihad as mentioned in the Quran is completely defensive and the verses of Jihad never indicate violence-seeking of the Quran and imposition of Islam on men. Therefore, the Quran cannot be accused of affirming and legislating immoral injunctions.