1
.Ph.D student of philosophy of Qom University. nameyenow@gmail.com
2
. Assistant Professor of philosophy and theology of Qom University. mr.dehghan91@yahoo.com
Abstract
In this paper, we compare between Ontological Argument and Seddiqin Argument and we assume that these Arguments represent two metaphysical point of view (Idealism and Originality of Being) and we assume that with regarding this representation, we can thought on these argument in more correct way. In our view, Ontological Argument is based on Idealism, and Idealism gone a fundamental change from premodern to modern period, for this reason, Ontological argument gone a fundamental change and this change entails to fundamental different in the sense of final consequence of this argument and by this reason, it is necessary that we regard this difference. Given that Presentation of two readings of ontological argument, we can find which reading of ontological argument Correspondence with seddiqin argument and which one diverge from it. Meanwhile, Given that different bases in Ontological Argument and Seddiqin Argument, we can obtain a more correct understand of metaphysical background of Ontological argument.
صدرالدین شیرازى، محمد بن ابراهیم،(1981)، الحکمة المتعالیة فى الأسفار العقلیة الأربعة (با حاشیه علامه طباطبائى)، 9جلد، دار إحیاء التراث العربی - بیروت، چاپ: سوم. .
---------------، (1360)، الشواهد الربوبیة فی المناهج السلوکیة،جلد 1، مرکز نشر دانشگاهى، چاپ: دوم. .
--------------، (1360)، اسرار الآیات ( تحقیق خواجوى )، 1جلد، انجمن اسلامی حکمت و فلسفه اسلامی، تهران، چاپ: اول.
طباطباِیی، محمد حسین،(1367)، نهایة الحکمه، انتشارات الزهراء، تهران. .
عبودیت، عبدالرسول،(1390)، خطوط کلی حکمت متعالیه، سمت، و مؤسسهی آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی(ره).
کاپلستون، فردریک، (1368)، تاریخ فلسفه، جلد 1، ترجمهی سیدجلالالدین مجتبوی، انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی و انتشارات سروش.
----------------،(1382)، جلد 7، ترجمهی داریوش آشوری، انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی و انتشارات سروش.
مطهری، مرتضی،(1369)، شرح منظومه، انتشارات حکمت، چاپ چهارم.
منزه، مهدی و کاوندی، سحر،(1396)، ملاصدرا؛ وحدت تشکیکی یا وحدت شخصی، دوفصلنامهی علمیپژوهشی حکمت صدرایی، سال پنجم، شمارهی دوم، بهار و تابستان.
هگل، گئورگ ویلهلم فردریش، (1356)، عقل در تاریخ، حمید عنایت، چاپ اوّل، مؤسسه انتشارات علمی دانشگاه صنعتی شریف.
منابع لاتین
Anselm, Saint, (2017), Archbishop of Canterbury, Basic writings, edited and translated by Thomas Williams, Hackett Publishing Company, Inc, www.hackettpublishing.com.
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, (2001), The Philosophy of History, With Prefaces by Charles Hegel and the Translator, J. Sibree, M.A, Batoche Books, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada.
---------------, (1990), Lectures on The History of Philosophy, VolumeIII, Edited by Robert F. Brown, Translated by R. F. Brown and J. M. Stewart, University OF California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford.
--------------, (1985), Lectures On The Philosophy of Religion, Together With Work On The Proofs Of The Existence Of God, The Translation Editet By The Rev. E. B. Spiers, B D, Vol. III, London, Kegan Paul, Trench, & Co LTD, 1895.
--------------, (2014), The Phenomenology of Mind, eBooks@Adelaide, The University of Adelaide Library, University of Adelaide, South Australia.
---------,(1991), Elements of the Philosophy of Right edited by Allen W. Wood, translated by H. B. Nisbet, Cambridge University Press.
Hymers, John Hymers, (2017), From Illumination to Science (and Back Again): The ontological arguments of St. Anselm and Hegel, European Centre for Ethics, Deberiotstraat, Belgium
Lauer, Quentin, (1982), Hegel's Concept of God, State University of New York Press.
Weiss, Frederick G, (2017), Beyond Epistemology, New Studies IN The Philosophy of Hegel, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, 1974.
Ghotby,A. , Danesh Shahraki,H. and Ramin,F. (2019). Comparative review of thological requirements of Hegel ontological argument with sadra seddiqin argument. Reason and Religion, 11(20), 75-98.
MLA
Ghotby,A. , , Danesh Shahraki,H. , and Ramin,F. . "Comparative review of thological requirements of Hegel ontological argument with sadra seddiqin argument", Reason and Religion, 11, 20, 2019, 75-98.
HARVARD
Ghotby A., Danesh Shahraki H., Ramin F. (2019). 'Comparative review of thological requirements of Hegel ontological argument with sadra seddiqin argument', Reason and Religion, 11(20), pp. 75-98.
CHICAGO
A. Ghotby, H. Danesh Shahraki and F. Ramin, "Comparative review of thological requirements of Hegel ontological argument with sadra seddiqin argument," Reason and Religion, 11 20 (2019): 75-98,
VANCOUVER
Ghotby A., Danesh Shahraki H., Ramin F. Comparative review of thological requirements of Hegel ontological argument with sadra seddiqin argument. Reason and Religion, 2019; 11(20): 75-98.