نشریه فلسفه غرب
پیاپی 2 (تابستان 1401)

The evil debate is one of the most important and at the same time the oldest problems of theological and philosophical issues. This is how the existence of evil in the material world, and especially in human life, can be justified, given the infinite knowledge and power of God and His benevolence towards creatures and human beings.It is one of the issues that has always occupied the minds of philosophers and theologians. The conflict between these attributes and the existence of evil is so serious and deep that some philosophers and theologians have been forced to deny the existence of evil altogether and others to deny their existence.In this article ،the descriptiveanalytical method of the philosophy of evil entering the system of creation has been studied by Avesina Leibniz and Spinoza. According to Avesina, true evil is neither inherently in the system of jurisprudence nor in breadth. Relative evil, although it is inside the system of divine judgment and predestination, is transversely inside and not in essence.The existence of relative evil can also be justified by the good system and there is no inherent conflict between them. Leibniz fully accepts this view and explains that the existence of metaphysical evil in the good system is a necessity. Unlike moral and natural evils that are not necessary. But Spinoza, in contrast to these two, considers calling things good or evil a human thing and a function of desires , and believes that there is no good or evil in fact.

Talking about the meaning of life and tying ethics and moral living with meaningful life, apart from any belief, has always been in the deep philosophical thought. Nigel made efforts in this field, who has his own intellectual-and-philosophical paradigms in the path of connecting biological ethics and meaningfulness of life. The purpose of the present research is to know the relationship between morality and meaning of life from philosophical perspective.

The used methodological approach is qualitative in which, through the analysis of Nigel works on ethics and the meaning of life, it has been achieved.

Believing in the alternative principle in ethics, Nigel acknowledges the fact that people have equal capacities and no person is superior to another. He considered the motivational foundation of morality in a person to be beyond desire and envisioned a moral action for him. He considers living ethically as a necessary component of the meaningfulness of life, and he believes that in addition to not believing in the world after death, the meaningfulness of this life can be achieved in the framework of biological ethics.

Results showed that due to coexistence, humans can influence each other’s lives and make the life of this world meaningful through moral prepositions, even if they do not believe in the afterlife. If we target the component of ethics and bioethics from our daily relationships and interactions, the life of this world will become an anomic focus and meaning will emerge from our personal and social relationships.

One of Heidegger's major citations in explaining the process of forgetting Being in the history of metaphysics is the lack of attention paid to ontological differentiation by metaphysical companions, according to which one should avoid reducing Being to a particular being. According to Heidegger, due to the lack of attention to ontological differentiation throughout the history of philosophy, philosophers have often neglected a careful study of the "meaning" and "truth" of Being. But as we know, one of the clever considerations of Muslim philosophers is to pay attention to the distinction between Being and quiddity. Serious attention to this distinction, which is first reflected in Farabi's philosophical views, has become one of the main foundations of ontology for Avicenna. The fundamental question here is whether the distinction between Being and quiddity and related issues can be considered by Muslim philosophers, especially Avicenna, as an example of Heidegger's desirable ontological differentiation. The results show that in Avicenna's intellectual system, Being is considered as an object; In such a way that even in mental analysis, the latter is considered to be what a being is and is not considered as a component of its identity. This way of dealing with the problem of Being, in addition to ignoring the question of the meaning and truth of Being, forgets it as a presence, ambiguity, and opening horizon and thus refuses to pay attention to Heidegger's desirable ontological differentiation.

Virtue is one of the fundamental issues of moral philosophy and one of the main pillars of Aristotle's and Farabi's philosophy. Farabi is one of the philosophers who, following Aristotle, has been interested in the topics of virtue and happiness . And he considers virtue to be a kind of human character and character which is known as moral character. Farabi's and Aristotle's point of view in examining virtue is influenced by their hedonistic view on morality and human perfection. These two philosophers believe that man is a perfectionist and happiness-seeker by nature, and he needs tools to achieve this lofty goal.virtue is considered an important factor to achieve happiness. Despite the similarities between the two philosophers in the issue of virtue, their differences should not be ignored. The most important difference between these two is related to the meaning of virtue, the way of dividing virtue, Farabi's special view of utopia. Aristotle made a kind of division about virtue; He divided virtue into moral and intellectual, but on the contrary, Farabi has stated three divisions for virtue in his written works. Virtue is to reach a higher goal called happiness, which is called ultimate good.Virtue is to reach a higher goal called happiness, which is called ultimate good. This article tries to express the most important human virtues and all kinds of virtues, especially the virtues that have the greatest effect on a person's attainment of happiness, as well as the ways to make a person virtuous.

Presumably, Brentano''s theory of intentionality besides his other theories of the mind, at least in some particular aspects, could be contrasted with some of the issues in Islamic philosophy including, issues on mental existence, some of Suhrawardi Illuminationist rules ( even Ghazzali in Mishkat al-anwar) on knower''s essential luminosity and its principality and centrality in cognition, compound theory of knowledge or knowledge of knowledge in Ibn Sina and others, human soul as a cosmos in Mulla Sadra, soul''s creation as real nature of perception at least sensible and imaginal level, essential awareness of the self to itself meanwhile, any other awareness, can be recourse to certain capacities on comparative studies. The present paper is an attempt to explore some centrality aspects of Brentano''s theory of intentionality in early and later forms and its outcomes such as reism. In this study, a glance will be cast at Muslim philosophers'' views in this regard in order to pave the way for a comparative study. In order to observe the standard of the journal, I refrain from going into detail about the issues. .

In this article, the problem of evil, which is an example of the corona virus, is discussed with an emphasis on the thoughts of David Griffin, one of the contemporary religious philosophers. Griffin believes that the evil in the world, including Corona, is caused by the fact that God created the universe not from pure nothingness, but from the primary matter that has inherent power and the evil in the world is caused by it. In addition, by emphasizing the inherent power of self-determination in real beings from small to large, she considers God's power to be communal, in such a way that they may oppose and resist the power of God, which causes the appearance of evil [corona] in the world. According to this point of view, Corona is a virus that has inherent power and affects other beings and acts in the way of its real possibility. Griffin's reason for proposing this view is based on the concreteness of Corona and other evils in human life and that they are not destroyed directly by God's power.