تحلیل نظریه های ارزش در تطبیق با افعال اخلاقی خداوند (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
نظریه های ارزش در پی تعیین معیار خوب و بد برای افعال اخلاقی هستند. به رغم تنوعی که در این نظریه ها وجود دارد هیچ یک تاکنون قابلیت انطباق بر افعال اخلاقی خداوند را نداشته اند. ازآنجاکه معیارهای ارائه شده، همچون انگیزه فضیلت مندانه، وظیفه، لذت، سعادت و قرب الهی مختص انسان بوده و در مورد سنجش خوب و بد افعال الهی ناکارآمد هستند باید به دنبال نظریه ارزشی بود که بر همه فاعل های اخلاقی، اعم از انسان و خداوند قابل انطباق باشد. در این نوشتار سعی بر آن است تا پس از بررسی مهم ترین نظریه های ارزش به روش تحلیلی، نظریه ارزشی معرفی شود که بتواند افعال الهی را نیز دربرگیرد. نتایج نشان می دهد نظریه های فضیلت محوریِ فاعل مبنا و وظیفه گرایی برای سنجش افعال الهی کارایی ندارند. فقط نظریه غایت گرای کمال گرا که شامل فضیلت محوری غایت انگار نیز می شود آن هم با تفسیری خاص، ظرفیت ارائه معیار برای افعال اخلاقی خداوند را دارد. به نظر می رسد اگر غایت افعال اخلاقی، «صِرف کمال» در نظر گرفته شود در این صورت، زمانی که بر اثر فعل اختیاری فاعل، کمالی تحقق یافت، غایت اخلاقی حاصل شده است؛ حتی اگر آن کمال برای افرادی غیر از خود فاعل باشد. بنابراین، به کمال رساندن مخلوقات از جانب خداوند که خود، کمال محض است عملی اخلاقی به شمار می رود.Analyzing theories of value in accordance with God's moral actions
Introduction The necessity of observing moral values by human beings is approved by every common sense and human nature; But does such a necessity also apply to the observance of moral values for God? If we accept that it is necessary for God to observe moral values, on what basis can we know whether God has acted morally or not? The truth is that knowing God as the moral agent and determining the theory of value God's actions has received less attention and no precise answer has been given. Value theories are responsible for determining the good and bad criteria for moral actions, and so far various value theories have been proposed to measure human moral actions. The most well-known theories of moral value include teleological theories, virtue-based theories, and conscientious theories. The fundamental problem in most of these theories is that they consider only man as a moral agent, and the criterion they offer is only for measuring the good and bad of human actions. Hence, in the face of the question of "whether God's actions are moral or not" they do not have a clear answer for the audience. Therefore, it is necessary to first examine whether we can basically consider God as a moral agent or whether the observance of moral values is only for man? Second, if God's actions can also be morally valued, by what criteria can we understand their morality? Are the criteria presented in the moral schools adaptable to God's actions, or should another theory of value be sought for God? In this research, we want to provide appropriate answers to such questions as possible. Methods In this research, the analytical method has been used to examine the extent to which the theories of virtue oriented, Deontological, and Teleological are applied to the actions of God. Results and Discussion The first theory of value to be examined is the theory of virtue oriented. Of course, those virtue ethics's views that have considered the criterion of valuing characters and recognizing virtues from vices as their end are considered as Teleological views, and any result obtained in examining the Teleological view also includes Teleological virtue ethics. Other virtue ethic's views are called Agent-based virtue ethics, which say that the criterion for good and bad deeds is only their motive; Not their goals and results. According to this view, the existence of good motives for God causes good deeds to be issued from Him, without pursuing a purpose from these deeds. This criterion is not acceptable for conforming to God's actions; Because God is wise and the requirement of wisdom is that all God's actions have a wise purpose. The second theory of value is the Deontological theory. The general criterion in this theory is that an action is moral and right when it is done only because of duty. Since this cannot be assumed to be a duty to God, this view also cannot be chosen as a theory of value for measuring God's actions; Because duty means where there is a right and the right cannot be achieved without ownership. God is the owner of everything; Therefore, no one has the right to oblige him to do something. The third theory under consideration is teleologicalism. The general criterion in teleology is this: if something leads us to the desired result, it is good, and if it leads us away from that result, it is bad. We have said that God is wise and the requirement of wisdom is that all God's actions have a purpose; Therefore, the main criterion of teleology is compatible with God's moral actions. But purposes such as profit, pleasure, power, and happiness, which have been proposed in kinds of teleological theories such as consequentialism and perfectionism, are all appropriate to man and cannot be considered as purposes for God. Nevertheless, the concept of "perfection" is one of the concepts that has the capacity to be presented to God; Because God is absolute perfection, and God's wisdom requires that the actions that come from Him be commensurate with Hi
تبلیغات
