نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
استاد، گروه فلسفه و کلام اسلامی، دانشکدۀ الهیات و معارف اهل بیت (علیهم السلام)، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
In an article, four critiques by Misbah of Mulla Sadra's argument of mutual correlation for proving the union of the intelligent and the intelligible, as well as one critique of his regarding the argument of light and darkness—which Mulla Sadra refers to within the context of the argument of mutual correlation without presenting it as an independent proof—have been critiqued. In the present article, which is written using an analytical-documentary method, an evaluation of these critiques reveals that none of them is valid. While Misbah’s statements exhibit some negligence, this can be easily clarified without undermining the essence of his critiques. Consequently, both premises of the argument of mutual correlation are found to be incorrect. The critique of the first premise posits that an intellectualized form, in the absence of an intelligent counterpart, is not inherently intellectualized. If the intellectualized form is considered an accident without its substratum (the intelligent), it cannot exist at all; therefore, an intellectualized form that does not exist cannot be deemed intellectualized. Thus, it cannot be asserted that the intellectualized form is inherently so, regardless of the existence of an intelligent counterpart. The critique of the second premise argues that the two mutually correlated entities are not coexistent. Furthermore, the argument of light and darkness is rejected, as the analogy of the soul to a blind eye is invalid.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)