نوع مقاله : اندیشه سیاسی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری گروه علوم سیاسی، اندیشه سیاسی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
2 استاد تمام گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.
3 استاد تمام گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده علوم سیاسی، واحد تهران مرکز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
4 دانشیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده علوم سیاسی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The concept of freedom as the most central issue in political and moral philosophy, it has always been the focus of attention of various schools of thought. The distinction in the definitions of freedom offered is mainly due to the differences in the anthropological foundations of each school. Meanwhile, the views of John Stuart Mill as a prominent representative of Western Liberalism and the thoughts of Morteza Motahari, as a renowned Islamic thinker, have a special place.
This study aims to explain the relationship between rationality and happiness (sa'ādat) in the anthropological foundations of freedom through a comparative analysis of John Stuart Mill and Morteza Motahhari's perspectives. Using a descriptive-analytical method and relying on the original texts of these two thinkers, the research findings indicate that in Mill's philosophical framework, autonomous human rationality holds a central position, while happiness is realized as an earthly and empirical matter through individual rational choices. In this framework, freedom is primarily understood as "freedom from" interference (negative liberty), which provides the necessary ground for individual rational choices. In contrast, in Motahhari's thought, happiness as a metaphysical and divine ultimate end directs rationality, and freedom is conceptualized as "freedom for" the actualization of innate nature (positive liberty). This fundamental difference in the relationship between rationality and happiness stems from the distinct anthropological foundations of the two thinkers; while Mill's anthropology is secular and reason-centered, Motahhari's is religious and nature-centered.
کلیدواژهها [English]