Document Type : Scientific Research

Authors

• Reza Dargahifar ¹
• Davood Hosseini ²

¹ Ph.D. in philosophy of Mind – Institute for Cognitive Science Studies, Tehran, Iran

² Associate Professor of Philosophy, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Sad al-Din Dashtaki, and following him, Mulla Sadra Shirazi maintains that all real compositions are unified. After a short review of Dashtaki’s thesis, we concentrate on Mulla Sadra’s version. Mulla Sadra believes that Dashtaki’s version is not coherent and he declines the existence of real parts. We will argue that Mulla Sadra’s objections do not work and furthermore, all things said and done there is no difference between these two versions of the thesis of unified composition. If there is any difference, it is about their theory of existence, not about their theory of composition. Sad al-Din Dashtaki, and following him, Mulla Sadra Shirazi maintains that all real compositions are unified. After a short review of Dashtaki’s thesis, we concentrate on Mulla Sadra’s version. Mulla Sadra believes that Dashtaki’s version is not coherent and he declines the existence of real parts. We will argue that Mulla Sadra’s objections do not work and furthermore, all things said and done there is no difference between these two versions of the thesis of unified composition. If there is any difference, it is about their theory of existence, not about their theory of composition.

Keywords

• Key Words: Unified Composition
• Matter and Form
• Intellectual Analytic Plurality
• Mind and Body
• Sad al-Din Dashtaki
• Mulla Sadra Shirazi

Main Subjects

• falsafe molasadra