A critical reflection on "necessity in relation" theory in explaining the nature of moral sentences and solving the Is/Ought problem

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. student of Transcendental Wisdom, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Faculty of Theology and Ahl-al-Bayt (Prophet's Descendants) Studies, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Faculty of Theology and Ahl-al-Bayt (Prophet's Descendants) Studies, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.

Abstract

According to the owners of the “necessity in relation” theory, explaining the nature of moral sentences and solving Hume's "Is/Ought" problem, are two things that are intertwined and Addressing one, is the same as addressing the other. This theory has been proposed in order to achieve very important issues in ethics, such as generality, certainty, realism, absolutism and having criteria for evaluating the moral system. Therefore, a critical look at this theory is very important. The aim and purpose of the article is to evaluate the “necessity in relation” theory, both in explaining the nature of moral sentences and in solving Hume's problem. The authors' approach has two stages. In the first stage, some foundations for evaluating a theory in solving the "Is/Ought" problem are presented. The second stage is done by presenting four critiques (based on the foundations presented in the first stage) around the ambiguities and foundations of this theory. According to the authors of the article, there are four criticisms on the “necessity in relation” theory: 1- circle and succession; 2- incompatibility with deontological ethics; 3- begging the question fallacy; 4- Denial of ethical primary self-evidents. The method used in this research is a descriptive-analytical inferential and problem-oriented style.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Aḥmadī, Ḥ. (2022). Moral Obligation from viewpoint of Islamic Contemporary Scholars. Qom: The imam Khomeyni Education and Research Institute. [In Persian]
  2. Fārābī. A. M. M. (2014). Fuṣuṣ al ḥikam. (Translate: H. Shohaei). Tehran: Mawlā. [In Persian]
  3. Ḥa’irī Yazdī, M. (2015). Investigations of Practical Reason. Tehran: Iran Wisdom & Philosophy Institute. [In Persian]
  4. Hume, D. (2009). An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. (Translate: M. Davoudi). Tehran: Markaz. [In Persian]
  5. Hume, D. (2021/a). A Treatise of Human Nature Book 3. (Translate: J. Paykani). Tehran: Qoqnoos. [In Persian]
  6. Hume, D. (2021/b). An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. (Translate: K. Lajvardi). Tehran: Markaz. [In Persian]
  7. Ibn Sina, Ḥ. A. (2015/a). al-Shifā, al-Ilāhiyāt. (Research: H. Hassanzadeh Āmulī). Qam: Publications of the Propagation Office. [In Persian]
  8. Ibn Sina, Ḥ. A. (2015/b). Dānesh-Name Alai. (Introduction: M. Moein & Correct: S. M. Meshkat & T. Binesh). Tehran: Mawlā. [In Persian]
  9. Ismāīlī, M. (2010). Philosophical Secondary Intelligible in Islamic Philosophy: A Historical Trend. Qom: The imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute. [In Persian]
  10. Jacobs, J. A. (2017). Ethics A-Z. (Translat: M. A. Taqawī, & Z. Alavī Rād). Tehran: Markaz. [In Persian]
  11. Jawādī, M. (1996). The Is/Ought problem. Qom: Islamic Propagation Office. [In Persian]
  12. Lārījānī, M. Ṣ. (2007). A theory in the analysis of ethical and rational requirements. Uṣul studies Quarterly, 3(7), 209-235. [In Persian]
  13. Lārījānī, M. Ṣ. (n.d.). Textbook of Moral Philosophy. Qom: Intellectual Sciences Encyclopaedia Library (No. 130). [In Persian]
  14. Majlesi, M. B. (1984). Mir'āt al uqul. Tehran: Dār al-Kotob al-Islamiyyah. [In Arabic]
  15. Miṣbāh Yazdī, M. T. (2008). Interpretation of Nahāyah al- Ḥekmah. (Edit: A. R. Obudiyyat). Qom: The imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute. [In Persian]
  16. Miṣbāh Yazdī, M. T. (2012/a). Questions and Answers. Qom: The imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute. [In Persian]
  17. Miṣbāh Yazdī, M. T. (2012/b). The Philosophy of Morality. Tehran: Bain-al Melal. [In Persian]
  18. Miṣbāh Yazdī, M. T. (2015). Review and Study of Ethical Schools. Qom: The imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute. [In Persian]
  19. Miṣbāh, M. (2003). Ethics. Qom: The imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute. [In Persian]
  20. Mo’allemī, Ḥ. (2009). Necessity in relation and Necessity-by-something else in content of Ethical oughts. Ghabasāt, 14(53), 139-156. [In Persian]
  21. Mo’allemī, Ḥ. (2010). The Principles and Standards of Morality. Qom: Hājar. [In Persian]
  22. Mo’allemī, Ḥ., & Abul-Qāsimzade, M. (2014). Self-evidence sentences in islamic thought. Āīni-HekmatQuarterly, 6(20), 121-154. [In Persian]
  23. Mowaḥḥedi, M. J. (2019). Deontology and Consequentialism in Ethics. Tehran: Negāhe-Moāser. [In Persian]
  24. Muḥammadīmunfarid, B. (2021). Moral Realism. Qom: Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy. [In Persian]
  25. Naṣerī, A. R. (2014). Is/Ought Relation. Qom: Al-Mostafā. [In Persian]
  26. Rāhnamāī, A. (2018). The Principles of Values. Tehran: Samt. [In Persian]
  27. Warnock, G. J. (1989), Contemporary Moral Philosophy. (Translate: M. Ṣ. Lārījānī). Tehran: Center of Translation & Publication. [In Persian]
  28. Yazdānpanāh, Y. (2022). Culture; What and How. Qom: Ketāb-e Fardā. [In Persian]

 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics