• Home
  • Mohammad Hosseinzadeh
  • OpenAccess
    • List of Articles Mohammad Hosseinzadeh

      • Open Access Article

        1 - Transformation of the Problem of “the Universal and the Particular” in Mulla Sadra’s Philosophy of Principiality of Existence
        Mohammad Hosseinzadeh
        One of the logical discussions which undergoes serious changes by accepting the principiality of existence is the problem of “the universal and the particular”. In the light of the principiality of existence and its ramifications, Mulla Sadra transformed the theory of a More
        One of the logical discussions which undergoes serious changes by accepting the principiality of existence is the problem of “the universal and the particular”. In the light of the principiality of existence and its ramifications, Mulla Sadra transformed the theory of all philosophers in this regard and reconstructed this problem in accordance to the principles of his own ontological philosophy. In his view, the criterion for universality is the intellectual existence, and the criterion for particularity is the particular, physical, and ideal existence. The known has to be abstracted from the particular, physical, and ideal existence in order to reach the level of universality. This abstraction is a truth different from the superficial abstract of other philosophers and can be called “promotional abstraction”. Mulla Sadra believes that the famous problem of the “gathering of universality and particularity” cannot be resolved based on the principles of other philosophers, whereas it is possible to do so on the basis of his philosophy. Moreover, he maintains that commonality means the ontological relation of an intellectual existent to individuals and not the potential presence of quiddity in them. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        2 - The Relationship between Human Nature and Moral Responsibility in Mulla Sadra
        Mohammad Hosseinzadeh Azam  Ghasemi Mohsen  Javadi Hadi  Vakili
        The principles of the Transcendent Philosophy as well as empirical observations indicate that people are different from each other in their primary nature. This explains why they are different in terms of their free will and voluntary acts. The present paper investigate More
        The principles of the Transcendent Philosophy as well as empirical observations indicate that people are different from each other in their primary nature. This explains why they are different in terms of their free will and voluntary acts. The present paper investigates Mulla Sadra’s view of the effects of human nature on their voluntary acts and examines its role in accepting responsibility. The formation of human nature in Mulla Sadra’s philosophy is different from that in other schools of philosophy. In the Transcendent Philosophy, the human nature originates in the material mode of the soul, and the differences among the natures of different human beings are rooted in the differences among corporeal substances. The attachment of this affair to the necessity of the cause-effect relation is the reason why moral responsibility is not explainable in Mulla Sadra’s philosophy. This problem poses certain challenges to Sadrian practical wisdom, the most important of which is the challenge of explaining the system of duty and recompense. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        3 - A Critical Study of Suhrawardī’s Method of Defining Things
        Mohammad Hosseinzadeh
        Suhrawardī has leveled five criticisms in order to demonstrate the inefficiency of the Peripatetic theory of definition and, in return, has suggested another method for defining things. This method, which is known as the “conceptual definition”, is based on a common sen More
        Suhrawardī has leveled five criticisms in order to demonstrate the inefficiency of the Peripatetic theory of definition and, in return, has suggested another method for defining things. This method, which is known as the “conceptual definition”, is based on a common sense understanding of the meanings of words. According to this method, words are defined through providing their conceptual bases in the view of linguists or the people of language. Here, the author firstly explains Suhrawardī’s method of defining things and then examines it critically. The critical analysis of his view reveals that the logical conclusion of his criticism of the Peripatetic theory of definition is the correction of this theory through employing intuition rather than leaving the definition of things based on their quiddity aside and advocating the theory of conceptual definition. Moreover, Suhrawardī’s theory of definition, as a replacement for its Peripatetic counterpart, suffers from several problems. Therefore, even if Suhrawardī’s objections to the Peripatetics’ theory of definition are accepted, his own method in this regard is not acceptable by itself. At the end of this paper, the author explains and criticizes the views of a contemporary researcher of Suhrawardī’s ideas who believes that the relationship between Ibn Sīnā’s and Suhrawardī’s logic of definition is one of completion rather than difference. Manuscript profile