عین الله خادمی[1] چکیده
اصل علت غائی – علی‌رغم این که در فلسفه اسلامی همچون خود اصل علیت از مسلّمات است– در میان فلاسفه غربی دغدغه‌آفرین شده است.
در شماره قبل با نظرات ارسطو، توماس آکوئینی، بیکن و دکارت درباره علت غایی آشنا شدیم و در این قسمت به دیدگاه‌های اسپینوزا، لایب‌نیتس، کانت و ژیلسون دراین‌باره می‌پردازیم.
اسپینوزا به شدت به نظریه غایت‌انگاری حمله کرده و دلایلی برای ابطال آن ذکر کرده است. در مجموع بعد از رنسانس قاطبه فیلسوفان و دانشمندان تعلیل مکانیستی (ماشینوارگی) را بر تعلیل بر مبنای غایت شناسی ترجیح دادند، اما لایب نیتس از نظریه غایت انگاری در دو عرصه فیزیک و متافیزیک به صورت جانانه دفاع کرد و کانت تفسیر ارسطویی این نظریه را در تاریک خانه تاریخ محبوس و خود تفسیر جدیدی از آن ارائه داد و از تفسیر خود دفاع نمود. اتین ژیلسون از حضور شاداب این نظریه در عرصه متافیزیک ـ نه علوم تجربی ـ دفاع می‌نماید و آن را به عنوان یکی از بنیادهای مسیحیت معرفی می‌کند.
***
Anticipate and turn away of the western philosophies with respect to theory of finalism
(Spinoza, Kant and Gilson)
چکیده [English]
Ein-o Allah Khademi* Abstract
Theory of finalism – in spite of the fact that it is from admitted premises in the Islamic philosophy like principle of causality- has been a problem in the western philosophy.
In the before issue, we got acquainted to the viewpoints of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Bacon and Descartes about final cause and in this section, proceed to the viewpoints of Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant and Gilson.
Spinoza attacked theory of finalism and expressed reasons for refutation it. Altogether after the Renaissance, the majority of philosophers and scientists preferred mechanical justification to which founded on the knowledge of final, but Leibniz defended hardly from the theory of finalism in two realms of physics and metaphysics and Kant ignored Aristotelian interpretation of this theory and presented himself a new interpretation from it and defended from his own. Etienne Gilson defends from lively presence of this theory in the realm of metaphysics – not in the experiential sciences – and introduces it as one of the Christianity's foundations.
Shahid Rajaei University, Tehran, Iran *
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
causality, efficient cause, Final cause, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Gilson
اصل مقاله
Anticipate and turn away of the western philosophies with respect to theory of finalism
Theory of finalism – in spite of the fact that it is from admitted premises in the Islamic philosophy like principle of causality- has been a problem in the western philosophy.
In the before issue, we got acquainted to the viewpoints of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Bacon and Descartes about final cause and in this section, proceed to the viewpoints of Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant and Gilson.
Spinoza attacked theory of finalism and expressed reasons for refutation it. Altogether after the Renaissance, the majority of philosophers and scientists preferred mechanical justification to which founded on the knowledge of final, but Leibniz defended hardly from the theory of finalism in two realms of physics and metaphysics and Kant ignored Aristotelian interpretation of this theory and presented himself a new interpretation from it and defended from his own. Etienne Gilson defends from lively presence of this theory in the realm of metaphysics – not in the experiential sciences – and introduces it as one of the Christianity's foundations.
Keywords: Causality, Efficient cause, Final cause, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Gilson
ابتدای صفحه