فعل الهی در جهان قانونمند: چرا ذات‌گراییِ استعدادی راه‌حلِ میانه است؟

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 دانشیار گروه فلسفه علم، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران.
2 استادیار گروه علم و دین، پژوهشکده مطالعات بنیادین علم و فناوری، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.
10.30497/prr.2026.248936.2041
چکیده
این مقاله با این پرسش آغاز می‌شود که کدام تصویر از «قانون طبیعت»، در میان انتظام‌گرایی هیومی، ضرورت‌گرایی نومولوژیک آرمسترانگ، یا ذات‌گراییِ استعدادی، بستر منسجم‌تری برای تبیین «فعل خاص الهی» فراهم می‌کند، بی آن که واقع‌گراییِ علمی و شأنِ الهیاتی مخدوش شود. استدلال ما بر دو دسته معیار استوار است. در سطحِ متافیزیکِ علم، از تمایزِ قانون و تعمیمهای تصادفی، اتکای موجه به شرطی‌های خلاف‌واقع و آزمون‌پذیری سخن می‌گویم؛ و در سطحِ الهیاتی، از حفظِ فاعلیت و حکمتِ خدا، استقلالِ عللِ طبیعی، تمایزِ فعلِ عام و خاص و شیوه مدیریتِ مسئله شر. با اتکا به این چارچوب نشان می‌دهیم که انتظام‌گرایی به مقارنه‌گرایی و تضعیفِ واقع‌گراییِ علمی می‌انجامد؛ و ضرورت‌گراییِ آرمسترانگ الهیات را میانِ دئیسم و مداخله‌گراییِ نامنسجم گرفتار می‌کند. این کاستی‌ها بنیادین و اصلاح‌ناپذیرند. در مقابل، مقاله از ذات‌گراییِ استعدادی دفاع می‌کند. بر اساس این دیدگاه، قانونْ صورتِ گرایش‌های درونیِ خواص است و ظهورِ آنها به «شرایطِ مناسب و فقدانِ موانع» وابسته است. بدین‌سان می‌توان فعل الهی را به منزله «تنظیم شرایط» فهمید، نه نقض قانون. با خوانش ظرفیت‌محورِ کارت‌رایت، قیدِ ceteris paribus از تبصره‌ای تضعیف‌کننده به شرطِ تبیینیِ ظهورِ ظرفیت‌ها بدل می‌شود؛ و با الگوی «معجزه قانون‌مدار» هندفیلد، یکتایی معجزه حفظ می‌گردد بی آن که قانون شکسته شود. ناظر به مسئله شر، این نظریه آن را از شبهات متافیزیکی پیرامونی پاک‌سازی کرده و صورت‌بندی دقیق‌تری از آن برای تأملات الهیاتی فراهم می‌آورد. نتیجه نهایی این است که نسخه تقویت‌شده ذات‌گرایی چارچوبی واحد برای هم‌افزاییِ فعل الهی و علل طبیعی عرضه می‌کند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Divine Action in a Lawful World: Why Dispositional Essentialism Is the Middle Way

نویسندگان English

Ebrahim Azadegan 1
Javad Darvish Aghajani 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy of Science, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Science and Religion, Institute for Science and Technology Studies, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده English

This paper begins with the question of which image of “the law of nature”, namely Humean regularism, nomological necessitarianism of Armstrong, or Dispositional Essentialism, provides the most coherent framework for explicating “special divine action” without undermining scientific realism or theological concerns. Our argument rests on two criteria sets. At the level of the metaphysics of science, we discuss the distinction between laws and accidental generalizations, the warranted reliance on counterfactuals, and testability; and at the level of theology, we address the preservation of divine agency and wisdom, the independence of natural causes, the distinction between general and particular divine action, and the management of the problem of evil. Relying on this framework, we show that regularity-based views incline toward occacionalism and undermine scientific realism, while Armstrong’s necessitarianism risks dragging theology between deism and an incoherent interventionism. These deficiencies are fundamental and irremediable. By contrast, the paper defends dispositional essentialism. In this way, divine action can be understood as “fine tuning conditions” rather than contravening the law. Reading Cartwright's capacity-centered approach, the ceteris paribus clause is transformed from a weakening caveat into an explanatory condition for the manifestation of capacities. And with the Handfield's model of a “law-abiding miracle,” the uniqueness of the miracle is preserved without breaking the law. Concerning the problem of evil, this theory clears it of extraneous metaphysical puzzles and offers a more precise formulation for theological reflection. The final result is that an enhanced dispositional essentialism provides a single framework for the coexistence of divine action and natural causes.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

laws of nature
Divine action
dispositional essentialism
Archer, Joel. 2015. "Against Miracles as Law-Violations: A Neo-Aristotelian Approach." European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 7, no. 4. https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v7i4.88
Armstrong, David. 1982. "Laws of Nature as Relations between Universals, and as Universals." Philosophical Topics 13, no. 1: 7–24. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43153907
Armstrong, David. 1983. What Is a Law of Nature? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beebee, Helen. 2014. "Hume and the Problem of Causation." In The Oxford Handbook of Hume, edited by Paul Russell. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199742844.013.8
Betenson, Toby. 2021. "The Problem of Evil Remains Logically Binding." Religions 12, no. 3: 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12030154
Bird, Alexander. 2005. "The Dispositionalist Conception of Laws." Foundations of Science 10, no. 4: 353–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-004-5259-9
Bird, Alexander. 2007. Nature's Metaphysics: Laws and Properties. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Carroll, John. W. 2024. "Laws of Nature." In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/winter2024/entries/laws-of-nature/.
Cartwright, Nancy. 1999. The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139167093
Cartwright, Nancy. and K. Ward, eds. 2016. Rethinking Order: After the Laws of Nature. London: Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2018.1424765
Dretske, Fred. I. 1977. "Laws of Nature." Philosophy of Science 44, no. 2: 248–268. http://www.jstor.org/stable/187350
Elgin, Mehmet, and  Elliott Sober. 2002. "Cartwright on Explanation and Idealization." Erkenntnis 57, no. 3: 441–50. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021502932490
Ellis, Brian. 2002. The Philosophy of Nature: A Guide to the New Essentialism. Stocksfield: Acumen Publishing.
Handfield, Toby. 2001. "Dispositional Essentialism and the Possibility of a Law-Abiding Miracle." The Philosophical Quarterly 51, no. 205: 484–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9213.00242
Henry, John. 2000. "Causation." In The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition: An Encyclopedia, edited by G. B. Ferngren, 35–42. New York: Garland Publishing.
Hughes, Christopher, and Robert. M. Adams. 1992. "Miracles, Laws of Nature and Causation." Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 66, no. 1: 179–205. https://doi.org/10.1093/aristoteliansupp/66.1.179
Hume, David. 1995, An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Of Miracles, ed. By Charles Hendel, London: Pearson publishing.
Hume, David.  2009. A Treatise of Human Nature. 2nd ed. Auckland: Floating Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00046221
Jacovides, Michael. 2020. "Hume and the Laws of Nature." Hume Studies 46, no. 1–2: 115–35. https://doi.org/10.1353/hms.2020.0000
Kim, Jaegwon. 2003. "The American Origins of Philosophical Naturalism." Journal of Philosophical Research 28, no. Suppl.: 83–98. https://doi.org/10.5840/jpr200328supplement28
Koperski, Jaegwon. 2019. Divine Action, Determinism, and the Laws of Nature. London: Routledge.
Lange, Marc. 2009. Laws and Lawmakers: Science, Metaphysics, and the Laws of Nature. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195328134.001.0001
Lewis, David. 1973. Counterfactuals. Malden, Mass: Blackwell.
Lewis, David. 1983. "New Work for a Theory of Universals." Australasian Journal of Philosophy 61, no. 4: 343–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048408312341131
Lewis, David. 1997. "Finkish Dispositions." The Philosophical Quarterly 47, no. 187: 143–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9213.00052.
McGinn, Colin. 2015. "The Mind of God." European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 7, no. 4: 157–71. https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v7i4.92
Otteman, Nathan. M., and Daniel. E. Flage. 2024. "Hume, Laws of Nature, and Miracles." The European Legacy 29, no. 7–8: 716–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2024.2387971
Pietroski, Paul., and Georges Rey.  1995. "When Other Things Aren't Equal: Saving Ceteris Paribus Laws from Vacuity." The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46, no. 1: 81–110. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/46.1.81
Plantinga, Alvin. 2011. Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Plantinga, Alvin. 2014. "The Free Will Defence." In Philosophy in America, edited by Max Black, 204–20. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315830636-10
Ritchie, Sarah. L. 2017. "Dancing around the Causal Joint: Challenging the Theological Turn in Divine Action Theories." Zygon 52, no. 2: 361–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12336
Schrenk, Marcus. 2011. "Interfering with Nomological Necessity." The Philosophical Quarterly 61, no. 244: 577–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2010.686.x
Shults, LeRon., Nancey. C. Murphy, and Robert. J. Russell. 2009. Philosophy, Science and Divine Action. Leiden: Brill.
Siler, L. David. 2023. "Divine Character: Iqbal's Conception of Divine Action and Armstrong's Laws of Nature." Theology and Science 21, no. 3: 390–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2023.2230428
Silva, Ignacio. 2014. "Revisiting Aquinas on Providence and Rising to the Challenge of Divine Action in Nature." The Journal of Religion 94, no. 3: 277–91.
Silva, Ignacio. 2015. "A Cause among Causes? God Acting in the Natural World." European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 7, no. 4. https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v7i4.89
van Strien, Marji. 2014. "On the Origins and Foundations of Laplacian Determinism." Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 45: 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2013.12.003
von Wachter, Daniel. 2015. "Miracles Are Not Violations of the Laws of Nature Because the Laws Do Not Entail Regularity." European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 7, no. 4: 37–60. https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v7i4.86
Weintraub, Ruth. 2013. "A New Humean Criticism of Our Inductive Practice." The European Legacy 18, no. 4: 420–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2013.791456

مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده
انتشار آنلاین از 17 خرداد 1405