The issue of motion in philosophy has been discussed from different angles. One of them is the discussion of the existence and survival of the subject of motion, particularly, in the trans-substantial motion, which was viewed as one of the concomitants of motion and one
More
The issue of motion in philosophy has been discussed from different angles. One of them is the discussion of the existence and survival of the subject of motion, particularly, in the trans-substantial motion, which was viewed as one of the concomitants of motion and one of the elements of its individuation in pre-Sadrian philosophies. Through presenting his innovative principles, Mulla Sadra transformed the view of motion and its concomitants, including the subject of motion, to a large extent. The problem of motion in the trans-substantial motion has always provoked controversial debates and conflicts in Mulla Sadra’s philosophical school and among neo-Sadrians.
In certain cases, Mulla Sadra emphasizes the need of trans-substantial motion for a subject, and in some other cases he overlooks it. The same point has always created some conflicts among the advocates of Sadrian school, including ‘Allamah Tabataba’i and Mutahhari. In this paper, while investigating different views and their strengths and weak points, the writers conclude that the trans-substantial motion does not need a subject; rather, motion in accidents is also needless of its subject. They also maintain that, given the Sadrian principiality of existence, one can support a single fluid existence in the real world which is by itself the same as motion, the mover, and the moved, and that distinguishing them from each other would only be possible through analysis.
Manuscript profile
