Naeimeh poormohammadi
Volume 2, Issue 4 , January 2026, , Pages 19-37
Abstract
If we leave rational paradigm of thought and go in to emotional one, the problem of evil is not logical or philosophical anymore, but it is existential. The simple form of this problem is that the relationship with God above all relations needs trust, safe, and satisfaction. But the problem is that the ...
Read More
If we leave rational paradigm of thought and go in to emotional one, the problem of evil is not logical or philosophical anymore, but it is existential. The simple form of this problem is that the relationship with God above all relations needs trust, safe, and satisfaction. But the problem is that the people who are suffering are not psychologically able to continue loveing and worshiping God. They are not satisfied with God and feel God's silence and absence. Logical answers (defences) and philosophical answers (Theodicies) are totally irrelevant and donot work at all. Man in this situation doesnot nead reason or argument but meaning. The meaning of suffering can gives his relation with God meaning again. In this paper we review on some meaning of suffering which Christian theologian find to solve the existential problem of evil.
Tahereh Baghestani; Hadi Vakili; N poormohammadi; Hosein Moosavi
Volume 11, Issue 2 , December 2023, , Pages 103-138
Abstract
The issue of the occurrence of evil in the system of creation is one of the issues that have always focused the minds of the thinkers of the world. The number of works that have appeared on this issue forms a long list. The contribution of theologians, scholars of religion, and philosophers of religion ...
Read More
The issue of the occurrence of evil in the system of creation is one of the issues that have always focused the minds of the thinkers of the world. The number of works that have appeared on this issue forms a long list. The contribution of theologians, scholars of religion, and philosophers of religion in this regard is significant, but the scope of long-term debates and conflicts in this regard is not limited to the scope of academic studies and researches, and has also been extended to the level of the general public, and inevitably sometimes they are divided into two groups of deniers of divine justice and Believers have divided it. The existence of evil, natural and unnatural ailments and shortcomings in the world, especially from this point of view, has attracted the opinion of theologians and philosophers of religion, which is not compatible with God's absolute knowledge, absolute power, and absolute goodness. According to them, solving this inconsistency is the main task of the researchers of the problem of evil. On the one hand, they seek to protect the theological propositions based on God's omniscience, omnipotence, and pure goodness, and on the other hand, they must explain the occurrence of this evil in the divine system in such a way as to be compatible with these theological propositions. Since these doubts are related to the most fundamental principle of divine religions, i.e. the proof or denial of God and the compatibility of divine attributes, the discussion and exchange of opinions by opponents and supporters has turned into a scene of long-lasting confrontations between them. As we will see, in the contemporary philosophy of religion, there have been various discourses on the issue of evil, among which three logical, relative and existential discourses are particularly famous. Philosophers of religion have responded to these three speeches in the form of defense, theodicy, and consolation-meaning, respectively. Although this issue has a long theological and philosophical history, this issue has not prevented the mystics from expressing their opinions and positions on this issue. The supreme example in this valley is Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi, a representative of theoretical mysticism and the founder of the Akbari school, who, from his special mystical perspective, discussed the problem of evil, and to explain the problem of evil and answer the doubts arising from it, from various mystical foundations such as Nizam God's names and attributes, the best system, stable nobles, and personal unity have benefited. In the field of mysticism, articles have been written that are close to this topic, which are remarkable not in terms of complete compliance with the topic, but in terms of the similarity and scope of the topic, and can be effective in a wider understanding of the issue. Among them, Javadinia, Mazaher, 2015, "Evil and how to find its way in Ahsan's system in the school of Ibn Arabi", Philosophy of Religion, second year, vol. 4, which examines and explains evil and how to find its way in Ahsan's system in Ibn Arabi's school based on symbols God's glory and the good names of God, especially the name of the Most Merciful, the principle of personal unity of existence and the principle of manifestation. Of course, in this work, new views have not been considered. Also, Sepahi, Mojtabi, 2014, "Judgment and destiny and its connection with eternal beings from Ibn Arabi's point of view", New religious thought, year 11, number 41, which aims to explain and analyze destiny and destiny with eternal beings and their relationship with personal unity of existence. And although he addressed Ibn Arabi, there is no mention of new views on the issue. Also, Amini, Hassan, 1387, "Good and evil in the school of Ibn Arabi", Maarif al-Aqli, Vol. 12, has investigated and explained the problem of good and evil in Ibn Arabi's view in terms of the personal unity of existence and the good system and in terms of determination. Ibn Arabi has specified and pointed out the problem of evil in various places of his many works, but especially in four places in the book Fass al-Hakm, namely in Fass Yusuf, Fass Zakariyavi, Fass Yunsi, and Fass Ayyubi, and several positions from the conquests of the Makkiyyah to discuss the ills. He has paid evil and harm. In this article, we will first present his claims and arguments about the problem of evil in two books, Fosus al-Hikam and Fatuhat al-Makiyya, and then we will extract the defenses and theodicies that can be attributed to him from these works. A look at Ibn Arabi's works shows that in terms of the personal unity of existence and the system of goodness, he considered evil to be absolutely excluded in the system of existence for the purposes of the simple deprivation of education; But from the point of view of determination, he considers non-existent matters to be inherently evil and in existential matters, he has accepted a kind of relative evil in the creation system and a kind of inherent evil in the legislation system. Also, based on his views on good and evil, God's providence and will, his knowledge is subordinate to his knowledge, and his knowledge is subject to the known, and his known is the fixed nobles and their conditions. Whatever God bestows on things, it is based on the requirements of their fixed virtues. Therefore, good and evil both return to the fixed principles of things, and since the fixed principles are immovable, therefore, God has absolute authority. Also, Ibn Arabi from defenses such as the illusory nature of evil, the absence of evil and the relativity of evil, and from theodicies such as theodicy of compensation, theodicy of free will, theodicy of the best possible world, theodicy of the cultivation of the soul, and theodicy of purity, theodicy of the process, theodicy of the cross, etc. The justification of the problem of evil seeks benefit. It seems that such efforts are highly successful. As we have seen, the capacity of Ibn Arabi's works is so significant that one can make defenses such as the illusory nature of evil, the absence of evil and the relativity of evil, and theodicies such as theodicy of compensation, theodicy of free will, theodicy of the best possible world, theodicy of soul cultivation, and theodicy of purity, theodicy of process, theodicy of crucifixion and He attributed others to him. It seems that conducting similar research on other Muslim mystics as well as other relevant sources in Islamic philosophy and theology can bring important achievements in today's explanation of the views of Muslim thinkers on the issue of evil.
................ ...............; N poormohammadi; ................. ................
Volume 11, Issue 2 , December 2023
Abstract
Cognitive science of religion (CSR) is a new field of cognitive science that was established in the 1990s when a group of cognitive science researchers focused on projects about religion. The three fundamental questions of this field in the most general state are: 1. How are religious ideas represented ...
Read More
Cognitive science of religion (CSR) is a new field of cognitive science that was established in the 1990s when a group of cognitive science researchers focused on projects about religion. The three fundamental questions of this field in the most general state are: 1. How are religious ideas represented in our brain? 2. How are religious ideas acquired? And 3. Which practices institutionalize these ideas? Most scientists of the cognitive sciences of religion considered religious beliefs and behaviors to be a by-product of the cognitive powers of the human mind. "Cognitive neuroscience of religion", as a sub-branch of cognitive science of religion, seeks to identify the neural correlates of religious beliefs, emotions, actions and experiences with brain imaging methods. In this article, in the first step, we introduce the "two main approaches in the cognitive neuroscience of religion", which include the "inefficient brain activity" approach and the "normal output of the brain nervous system" approach. In the second stage, we will discuss "various models of explaining religious experience" in cognitive neuroscience. These models include "God's halmet", "altered states of consciousness", "neuro-physiological relaxation response", "neurocognitive-cultural process", "recruitment of all brain regions", "social cognition region of the brain" and "combination of hierarchical predictive coding model"(HPC) and complexity drop model of supernaturality (CDMS). In the third stage, we show that the introduction of cognitive neuroscience to the explanation of religious experience faces limitations and challenges that need to be resolved. These four challenges are: "conceptual diversity and complexity", "particularity of mental matter", "semantic challenge", and "ontological challenge".
Tahereh Baghestani; Hadi Vakili; Naeme poormohammadi; Hosein Moosavi
Volume 11, Issue 1 , June 2022, , Pages 33-52
Abstract
The problem of evil has occupied the human mind for a long time and thinkers have tried to answer it in many different ways. These ways are sometimes proposed to prevent the feeling of atheism or despair towards the creator of the universe and sometimes to reduce suffering or anxiety in life. In the ...
Read More
The problem of evil has occupied the human mind for a long time and thinkers have tried to answer it in many different ways. These ways are sometimes proposed to prevent the feeling of atheism or despair towards the creator of the universe and sometimes to reduce suffering or anxiety in life. In the tradition of Islamic mysticism, Ibn َArabi, who is the founder of the Akbari school, has provided a solution in this field based on his own mystical principles, namely, Nizam Ahsan, the system of divine names and attributes, fixed entities, and the personal unity of existence. In this article, we are trying to discover and reconstruct Ibn Arabi's answer in this context about the problem of evil based on the existential interpretation, based on these mystical foundations and with regard to contemporary approaches in the philosophy of religion. Based on this solution, from Ibn Arabi's point of view, evil is a relative matter and bound to the determinations and capabilities of the existing phenomena, and since according to the names of divine goodness, the whole system is good, and according to the theory of personal unity of existence, the truth of existence is unique to God. Giving meaning and consolation becomes possible with the presence of God.
Naeimeh poormohammadi; AhmadReza Hashemi
Volume 9, Issue 2 , January 2020, , Pages 143-167
Abstract
We are more or less familiar with William's evidential problem of evil. He denies the existence of God or (in his later articles) the possibility of the existence of God by not finding God's justifing reasons for permiting evil. Theists, on the other hand, have tried to expose God's justifiing reasons ...
Read More
We are more or less familiar with William's evidential problem of evil. He denies the existence of God or (in his later articles) the possibility of the existence of God by not finding God's justifing reasons for permiting evil. Theists, on the other hand, have tried to expose God's justifiing reasons for permiting evil and to offer justifications called Theodicy. In the meantime, Skeptical Theism in response to the problem of evil has chosen another way. The claim is that we human beings may not be able to fundamentally grasp God's justifiing reasons for permiting evil, and since not finding reason is not a strong reason for not having a reason, the evil argument falls. In this article, we first explain the skeptical theological approach of William Alston and Michael Bergman, and then, based on the challenges posed by other philosophers of religion and theologians, conclude that the skeptical theological approach has not yet been plausible. In this article we have considered only moral challenges.We have extracted, formulated and analyzed eleven challenges from various texts of philosophers of religion, and carefully followed the problems and re-answers from both sides of the conflict, and finally came to the conclusion that skeptical theism answer is not still sufficient and convincing. It seems that the evil argument must still be resisted on the apologentic side of Theodicy.
Naeimeh poormohammadi
Volume 5, Issue 1 , August 2016, , Pages 27-50
Abstract
George Mavrodes, philosopher of religion and revised epistemologist, offers a new interpretation of argument by means of which one can take a new look at the traditional arguments for the existence of God. Adding two conditions of ‘certainty’ and ‘persuasion’ to the two former ...
Read More
George Mavrodes, philosopher of religion and revised epistemologist, offers a new interpretation of argument by means of which one can take a new look at the traditional arguments for the existence of God. Adding two conditions of ‘certainty’ and ‘persuasion’ to the two former conditions of ‘validity’ and ‘soundness’, he pictures argument as a two-dimensional or compositional concept that consists of two objective elements (validity and soundness) and two subjective elements (certainty and persuasion). Given this description of the nature of argument, it seems that one can firstly recognize the wide disagreement among proponents and opponents of the arguments for the existence of God, and secondly with regard to the subjective elements of argument, one can defend some firm and cogent narratives of these arguments.
