نشریه خردنامه صدرا
پیاپی 64 (تابستان 1390)

Clearly, the world of nature is continually in a state of change and evolution. All of us experience such changes in our daily life; for example, we see that a plant rises from under the soil, grows bigger, becomes green, and finally dries out and turns into soil. Even solid things are not immune against such changes and evolutions, and older phenomena continually are replaced by newer ones through physical and chemical interactions.Therefore, the element of change in phenomena in an evident and undeniable fact; however, there are some serious debates among philosophers and thinkers regarding the philosophical interpretation and explanation of this change. Some of the controversies in this respect are as follows:Does this change occur in the form of “generation and corruption”, i.e. in a sudden and discontinuous way, or in the form of a motion, i.e. gradually and continuously? How inclusive is this change? Does motion occur only in accidents and phenomena or does it also take place in the substance or essence of things? Is this change in the form of dressing after undressing, i.e. corruption and generation, or is it in the form of dressing after dressing, i.e. is the object continually in the state of becoming and moving from potency to actuality? This paper examines and criticizes the theories of philosophers and thinkers on motion.

Ethics and ethical values cannot be separated from the human life. Accordingly, all scholars of ethics have emphasized its importance and warned against taking no heed of it. On the other hand, Man’s intellectual tendency towards ethical discussions demands a study of the effects of philosophical achievements on ethical views. One of the important topics in the Transcendent Philosophy that can create an evolution in ethics as a demonstrative product is the trans-substantial motion. Motion in substance has had several consequences most of which have been explored in the field of philosophy. One of them has been rendering the theory of “the corporeal origination and spiritual subsistence of the soul” into a demonstrative one. This, in return, will be of noteworthy effects on ethical discussions. In this regard, we can refer to the changeability of Man’s morality, the confirmation of realism in ethics and its propositions, the clarification of the stages of the perfection of the soul, the demonstration of the immortality of the soul, and the justification of the embodiment of acts in the Hereafter. A study of this issue, in addition to strengthening its intellectual dimension in ethics, leads to its increasing influence on improving people’s individual and social behavior in line with religious laws.

Personal identity is one of the important and complex issues in the field of the philosophy of the soul. It is also related to the philosophy of ethics and metaphysics in different respects and has given rise to some problems in these two areas. The justification of ethical responsibility and man’s eternity in the posthumous state have attracted psychologist-philosophers’ attention to the significance and necessity of explaining personal identity. This paper examines the issue from the view point of Mulla Sadra. Here, the writer initially refers to some of the most important contemporary theories about personal identity which can generally be divided into two reductionist and non-reductionist branches. Reductionists intend to reduce the human identity to elements such as memory, biological specifications, or continuous psychological states, while non-reductionists are against this. Mulla Sadra’s theory in this regard is not in conformity with any of the above theories; however, it is more consistent with the non-reductionist approach from certain aspects. Though relying on the fundamental ontological and psychological principles of his own philosophy, Mulla Sadra tries to present a picture of human identity that, while depending on human nature, reveals personal identity, too. This is an identity in whose process of formation the three elements of habits, intentions, and acts play major roles. The extent of the consistency of these three elements with rationality is the reason behind having people with different identities. It should also be added that no human being enjoys a single and fixed identity; rather, identity is a continuous reality that, while being one, is a plural truth.

The problem of the soul is one of the important philosophical problems that has attracted the attention of thinkers since ancient times. Therefore, various opinions have been put forward regarding its nature and existence during the history of human thought. Apparently, Aristotle was the first philosopher to provide a clear definition of the soul. Among Muslim Peripatetics, following Aristotle, Ibn Sina defined the soul as the first perfection for the natural organic body and, through analyzing its specific features, tried to remove the short comings of Aristotle’s view. Through influencing the Aristotelian definition by his religious attitude and insight and acknowledging the immateriality of the soul from the beginning of its creation, Ibn Sina presents a view of the soul which is to some extent close to that of Plato and the theory of the duality of the soul and body.Like Ibn Sina, Mulla Sadra apparently accepts the Aristotelian definition of the soul; however, given the fundamental principles dominating his Transcendent Philosophy, his comprehensive view, and inter-disciplinary approach, he defines the nature and reality of the soul in a way that, in addition to removing all the ambiguities and defects involved in the Peripatetics’ definition, leads to some other basic consequences and differences in the domain of the problems related to the knowledge of the soul.

Nowadays, in modern logical discussions reference is made to a new logic called fuzzy logic. This field was introduced under this name by Professor Lotf‘alizadeh to the world. Fuzzy logic criticized classical Aristotelian logic because here, when describing the realities, Aristotle draws a distinct line between “zero and one” and “black and white”. However, according to fuzzy logic the external world is like a graded continuum, thus, in order to know about it, instead of speaking of “A or non-A”, we must speak of “A and non-A” so that the different cases between zero and one or the gray areas between black and white are not ignored either.If we cast a glance at Sadrian philosophy, we will witness some elements such as gradation in the objective world, the trans-substantial motion, and also some ambiguous fuzzy collections that lead the Transcendent Philosophy towards fuzzy philosophy. However, Mulla Sadra’s philosophy, rather than merely following a fuzzy approach, is a fuzzy philosophy in which elements such as Man, the world, and the relationship between God and the world have been portrayed in a fuzzy form. The creation of human beings has been initially corporeal and its continuity in the form of a trans-substantial motion until reaching the level of rationality and even leaving the soulish state is a good example of a fuzzy and continuum-like design of a picture in Sadrian anthropology. The fuzzy Transcendent Philosophy, while acknowledging its differences from the modern fuzzy logic, is very useful for attaining a true knowledge of Man and reality.

Almost all philosophers consider Kant as the founder of a view based on which “existence” is not a real predicate. Max Black is also one of the famous analytic philosophers most of whom believe that “existence” can only be the quantifier of particular (ontological) propositions; therefore, it cannot function as their predicate. As a result, existence cannot be predicated on objects and individuals. In order words, it can never be considered as one of the characteristics of people and things. However, this paper intends to demonstrate in its first and second parts that two of the mental tests that these two philosophers have designed, namely, the distinction between the real Caesar and the possible Caesar (Kant) and the assumption of two completely similar and, at the same time, different globes (Max Black), can be formulated as two arguments for the theory of the principiality of existence. These two intellectual tests also testify to this view of Mulla Sadra that this theory is so evidently true that it is, although in a crude and unconscious form, the mental basis and ontological presupposition of those philosophers whose philosophical ideas are not apparently much consistent with this theory. The last part of this paper briefly deals with the relationship between existence and quiddity based on the theory of the principiality of existence and provides answers to some of the objections advanced against it.

Upon the introduction of the theory of the principiality of existence and mentally-positedness of quiddity by Mulla Sadra to the field of thought, the world of Islamic wisdom was so much impressed that thinkers in the field of philosophy tried to interpret and justify even the thoughts and ideas of early philosophers in terms of this theory. Suhrawardi, one of the most distinguished Muslim philosophers, was no exception in this regard. There have been numerous views as to whether he advocated the principiality of quiddity, light, or existence. Some maintain that he was an advocate of the principiality of quiddity, and some argue that he was a proponent of the principiality of light.Nevertheless, none of the above theories is in complete conformity to his discussions. Therefore, considering the point that at the time of Suhrawardi, the problem of principiality was not as prevalent as it was in Mulla Sadra’s time, the question is whether Suhrawardi’s principles are more consistent with the principiality of existence or the principiality of quiddity? His words about light can be compared to and matched with similar discussions in the Transcendent Philosophy on existence and demand some analysis. On the other hand, he has also propounded some ideas concerning existence. Through paying attention to them and searching for similar cases in Mulla Sadra’s words, on can grasp a clearer view of the quality and quantity of this conformity. Moreover, Shaykh al-Ishraq has some ideas that refer to the principiality of quiddity, such as believing in the mentally-posited nature of existence and the madeness of quiddity. The writers of this paper have deliberated over these ideas and tried to examine and analyze their different dimensions. Finally, they conclude that Suhrawardi’s ideas are more consistent with the principiality of existence.