Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and Badness

What is moral goodness and moral badness? This is one of the most important questions in metaethics. Mu'tazila and Imami theologians have given different answers to this question, but their most frequent analysis of goodness and badness can be placed in three main groups: negative analysis, pos...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Taleqani SayyedAli, Hossein Rafiei
Format: Article
Language:fas
Published: Maarej Research Institute of Revelation Sciences 2023-05-01
Series:اخلاق وحیانی
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ethics.isramags.ir/article_173506_6785a8ff9b8976dee3ca915fee4d6393.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849318956380192768
author Taleqani SayyedAli
Hossein Rafiei
author_facet Taleqani SayyedAli
Hossein Rafiei
author_sort Taleqani SayyedAli
collection DOAJ
description What is moral goodness and moral badness? This is one of the most important questions in metaethics. Mu'tazila and Imami theologians have given different answers to this question, but their most frequent analysis of goodness and badness can be placed in three main groups: negative analysis, positive analysis, and analysis containing elements of reward or divine punishment. We call these three groups of analysis "common analysis" for short. In this paper, the first group of common analysis, i.e. negative analysis, are formulated and then evaluated. First, we have formulated the differences of opinion and ambiguities in this group of analysis of moral goodness and badness in the form of different readings of the negative analysis, and then we have examined and evaluated each one. Among the problems of different readings, we can mention the following: 1) Negative analysis do not have a sufficient conditions to be good. 2) These analysis imply the false or controversial assumption that no conscious and voluntary action is devoid of moral value. 3) In many of these analysis, good act and bad act are confused with good actor or bad actor. 4) These analysis define good and bad based on condemnation and non-condemnation, while praising and condemning an act is not necessarily moral and may be, for example, based on criteria aimed at immoral, expedient or aesthetic goals. In the last section, there are additional problems with negative analysis that lack the element of entitlement.
format Article
id doaj-art-bc1ac0ac81634af8baea5dfd37d6c357
institution Kabale University
issn 2383-3025
language fas
publishDate 2023-05-01
publisher Maarej Research Institute of Revelation Sciences
record_format Article
series اخلاق وحیانی
spelling doaj-art-bc1ac0ac81634af8baea5dfd37d6c3572025-08-20T03:50:39ZfasMaarej Research Institute of Revelation Sciencesاخلاق وحیانی2383-30252023-05-01131356310.22034/ethics.2023.173506173506Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and BadnessTaleqani SayyedAli0Hossein Rafiei1Faculty of Philosophy and Theology; Baqir al-Olum University, Qom, IranFaculty of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Akhoond Khoraasaani Center for Islamic Graduate Studies.What is moral goodness and moral badness? This is one of the most important questions in metaethics. Mu'tazila and Imami theologians have given different answers to this question, but their most frequent analysis of goodness and badness can be placed in three main groups: negative analysis, positive analysis, and analysis containing elements of reward or divine punishment. We call these three groups of analysis "common analysis" for short. In this paper, the first group of common analysis, i.e. negative analysis, are formulated and then evaluated. First, we have formulated the differences of opinion and ambiguities in this group of analysis of moral goodness and badness in the form of different readings of the negative analysis, and then we have examined and evaluated each one. Among the problems of different readings, we can mention the following: 1) Negative analysis do not have a sufficient conditions to be good. 2) These analysis imply the false or controversial assumption that no conscious and voluntary action is devoid of moral value. 3) In many of these analysis, good act and bad act are confused with good actor or bad actor. 4) These analysis define good and bad based on condemnation and non-condemnation, while praising and condemning an act is not necessarily moral and may be, for example, based on criteria aimed at immoral, expedient or aesthetic goals. In the last section, there are additional problems with negative analysis that lack the element of entitlement.https://ethics.isramags.ir/article_173506_6785a8ff9b8976dee3ca915fee4d6393.pdf"moral goodness and badness"" mutakallimūn""negative analysis""praise and blame""good act and bad act""good actor and bad actor"" entitlement"
spellingShingle Taleqani SayyedAli
Hossein Rafiei
Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and Badness
اخلاق وحیانی
"moral goodness and badness"
" mutakallimūn"
"negative analysis"
"praise and blame"
"good act and bad act"
"good actor and bad actor"
" entitlement"
title Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and Badness
title_full Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and Badness
title_fullStr Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and Badness
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and Badness
title_short Assessment of Mutakallimūn's Negative Common Views on Nature of Moral Goodness and Badness
title_sort assessment of mutakallimun s negative common views on nature of moral goodness and badness
topic "moral goodness and badness"
" mutakallimūn"
"negative analysis"
"praise and blame"
"good act and bad act"
"good actor and bad actor"
" entitlement"
url https://ethics.isramags.ir/article_173506_6785a8ff9b8976dee3ca915fee4d6393.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT taleqanisayyedali assessmentofmutakallimunsnegativecommonviewsonnatureofmoralgoodnessandbadness
AT hosseinrafiei assessmentofmutakallimunsnegativecommonviewsonnatureofmoralgoodnessandbadness