چکیده:
In the Islamic philosophy and western philosophy, there are various explanations of the consistency between causal necessity and free will. The soul’s agency by manifestation for hierarchal willpowers, presented by Mulla Sadra as an explanation for this consistency, has considerable similarity to the view presented by Harry Frankfurt and Gary Watson (as another type of hierarchal approaches). These similarities are as follows: the role of hierarchal willpowers in strengthening human’s identity, the role of higher order willpowers in controlling the willpowers of the lower order and human’s actions, the hierarchal desires leading to a deep self as the main controller of those desires and willpowers, and no interference of the alternative possibilities (the possibility of available options) in the reality of free will. The important difference between Mulla Sadra’s approach and the two other approaches is that in Frankfurt and Watson’s approach, human’s deep self (as the ultimate origin of willpower) is not truly an essential thing; and this causes their hierarchal approach not to offer an acceptable answer for the drawback of vicious circle of willpowers; but in Mulla Sadra’s approach, this deep self is truly an essential thing that causes the hierarchal willpowers not to continue infinitely. Therefore, while Mulla Sadra’s approach enjoys the merits of Frankfurt and Watson’s approach in explaining the optional nature of willpower and controlling the desires, it lacks their drawback and is a more proper approach for consistency.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The causality through the self-manifestation of the soul (fa'iliyat bi-al-tajalli al-nafs) for hierarchical wills, which Sadr al-Muta'allihin has proposed to explain this compatibility, shares significant similarities with the views of Harry Frankfurt and Gary Watson (who represent another type of hierarchical approach).
The important difference between Sadr al-Muta'allihin's approach and the other two approaches is that in the Frankfurt and Watson approaches, the human deep self (which is the ultimate source of the will) is not truly an essential matter, and this causes their hierarchical approach to lack an acceptable answer to the problem of the infinite regress of wills.
4. Comparison of Frankfurt and Watson's views with Mulla Sadra's view By carefully examining the three compatibilist approaches mentioned, it can be realized that many similarities can be observed between the views of Mulla Sadra, Harry Frankfurt, and Gary Watson regarding the difference between human and animal will, multiple human inclinations, and their relationship with one another: First similarity is that in the view of these three philosophers, the existence of higher-order inclinations and wills is considered one of the essential characteristics of humans; Second, in the view of all of them, these inclinations play a controlling role and grant humans the ability to, through them, prevent the realization of lower-order inclinations and their conversion into action; The third similarity is that these inclinations ultimately lead to a deep self—which can be interpreted as the nature of the person; Fourth, none of them consider free will to require the power to do something other than this (alternative options or possibilities); they present an account of free will in which the principle of alternative possibilities has no place; The fifth similarity between Watson's and Mulla Sadra's views is the emphasis on practical reason and its role in controlling the hierarchy of inclinations.
(
, 
, 
)
