چکیده :
در الهیات مسیحی که با الهیات اسلامی بیگانه نیست، راجع به خاستگاه نفس، به‌طور سنتی سه دیدگاه وجود دارد: «آفرینشگرایی»، «تولدگرایی»، و «تقدم وجودی».
«دوگانه‌‌انگاری جوهری نوخاسته» دیدگاه چهارمی است که به‌تازگی با تأثیر از نگاه علمی و تکاملی نوخاسته‌‌گرایان مطرح شده است.
در این نگاه سیستمی و کل‌‌گرایانه، ذهن/نفس از نظام ارگانیک بدن و از طریق فرایندها و تعاملات طبیعی و شبکه‌‌ای پیچیده از ارتباطات عصبی تولید شده است، نه اینکه از بیرون بدن قرار داده شده باشد.
در این مقاله با توجه به شباهت زیاد «دوگانه‌‌انگاری جوهری نوخاسته» و دیدگاه جسمانیه‌الحدوث صدرا، این دو نظریه دربارة خاستگاه و منشأ نفس مطالعه می‌‌شوند.
روش پژوهش، تطبیقی، تحلیلی و استدلالی است.
هدف این پژوهش، کشف و طرح نقاط ضعف و قوت هریک از این دو نظریه و رسیدن به دیدگاه متعالی‌‌تر دراین‌‌باره است.
یافته‌‌ها: تصور برخی شارحان از جسمانیه‌الحدوث صدرایی آن است که نفس با ترکیب عناصر و تحقق مزاج و از طریق حرکات اشتدادی و جوهری، از جسم تولید میشود؛ اما توجه دقیق‌‌تر به نگاه صدرایی، علاوه از اینکه او را پیشتاز نوخاستهگرایی معرفی می‌‌کند، با رفع خلأهای تبیینی این دیدگاه، او را در زمرة آفرینش‌‌گرایان قرار می‌‌دهد.
نگاهی که امروزه جامع بین علم، دین و فلسفه است و ازاین‌‌رو با نام «آفرینشگرایی نوخاستة صدرایی» در حکم گزینه و نظریه‌‌ای بسط‌پذیر و شایان توجه به فلاسفة دین و متکلمان پیشنهاد میشود.
in the theological discussions of christianity, which is not alien to the theological issues of islam, there are three broad views on the soul’s origin: traducianism, creationism and pre-existence view.
but today, in philosophy of religion and literature of mind, william hasker posits an alternative view of origins called emergent substance dualism.
tertullian believed in traducianism that means “souls following the creation of the first pair (i.e.
adam and eve) successively generate additional souls (i.e.
diachronically not synchronically) where souls are parturient or fissile”.
“according to traducianism, god creates at least one soul directly and immediately”.
soul is produced by physical parents and with physical body.
some verses of the holy book support this but it is not clear how immaterial soul can be generated through a completely physical process.
the view of creationism is that god creates souls directly and immediately in mother's womb.
this view was supported by many early fathers of the church and some statements of the holy book.
on the pre-existence view god created all human souls prior to the creation of the world in a heavenly state.
this view is based on the idea that there is a kind of "store of souls" in the sky where god stores souls and he expects to baby's body in mother' womb be created and then attaches the soul to it.
this view has no holy book support.
on hasker’s emergent substance dualism, evolutionary movement, hierarchical system, systematic communications and network interactions of elements lead to emergence of novel soul, a new thing which cannot be attributed to its underlined components and relation of those components.
it is the physics that has the power or ability to develop and create soul - regardless of the divine relief and assistance of god.
at first glance, emergentism and creationism seem to be alien; but, if causality is put aside in emergentist arguments, it becomes a magical quality.
because without any explanation, higher level features suddenly are occurred and if causation is accepted, this theory has an explanatory gap.
in fact, the emergence of higher levels such as thinking from the lower level neurological events needs the existence of effect to be superior than cause.
if the effect is more complete, then the effect has given up something that lacks it! and then higher level features have emerged from nothing.
lower level entities can be able to produce system properties, but these properties do not exceed in their existences from the level existence of those entities.
assuming this scientific fact that in the course of evolution , creatures become more complex and higher than simpler and lower ones, this problem arises that how these phenomena can be realized without destroying the causality principle that: no effect can be greater than its own cause.
sadra with offering philosophical foundations of principality of the existence, intensifying and substantial movement, analogical gradation and hierarchy of existence gave his theory of soul's corporeal origination.
, there are similarities and differences between this approach and hasker's approach.
in the monotheistic and quranic viewpoint of sadra, everything reflects the existence of god , then the soul apparently emerge from matter but verily god diffuses as it seems that water slake, but god really slakes, or seems that doctor cures but god really cures.
because the relationship between the creatures and the creator is reflective, like as reflection of the sunlight and moonlight.
therefore , if the matter is productive and the creator of the soul , this creation and production in sadra's view is reflective and true agent is god the creator of the soul .but even in sadra 's view, the body has not reflective agency and creation for soul; body is merely receptive.
somebodies unfortunately make mistakes that in sadra's view the producer of soul is body like evolutionism and dualist emergentism of hasker.
sadra's view about soul origination includes creationism, evolutionism, emergentism and even pre-existence view.
it has positive points of creationism, evolutionism, emergentism and even pre-existence without negative points of them.