Criticism of the duality of causality-coincidence and the solution to the challenge arising from it based on Lewis's idea of possible worlds

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
Ali Asghar Jafari Valani
Mohammad Javad Mikaeili
Department of Philosophy - Faculty of Theology - Shahid Motahari University
10.58209/jpt.5.2.179
Abstract
The duality of causality-coincidence is one of the important issues in the history of human thought. The theory of causality in Islamic philosophy was formed on the axis of essential possibility and, after passing from the elementary period, reached its peak in Allameh Tabataba'i. On the other hand, the theory of coincidence reached its perfection in David Hume after its development. The parties to the dispute argue around this axis whether the preference of existence over non-existence in essences requires a preferred cause or not? Regardless of whether the aforementioned preference is due to a cause or chance, the more important question is whether the occurrence of the aforementioned preference in essence is possible or not? If this preference is impossible, the necessity of the existence of a third perspective and a departure from the aforementioned duality is established. This article seeks to explain the aforementioned challenge and present a solution based on Lewis's idea of ​​possible worlds. Of course, this perspective has no connection to Lewis's causal perspective.

Keywords

  1. -Hume, David.(1969).A Treatise of human nature.penguin Book.
    -Hume, David.(1988). Enquiry concerning human nature. Open cout.
    -Nolan, Daniel.(2005). David Lewis.Montreal & Kingston.McGill-Queen’s University Press.
    -Sadr, Mohammad Bagher.(1982). Logical bases for induction. Fourth. Beirut. Dar Al Taarif for Publications.[Arabic]
    - Tabataba'i, Mohammad Husein.(2006).The end of wisdom.Qom. Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute Publication Center (R.A.)[Arabic]
    -Tabataba'i, Mohammad Husein.(2010). The beginning of wisdom.Twenty-seventh.Qom.Islamic Publishing Institute.[Arabic]
    -Tabataba'i, Mohammad Husein.(2011).Principles of Philosophy and the Method of Realism.Tehran.Sadra Publications.[Persian]
  2. Abbasian Chaleshtari MA (2000). Causality. Articles and Reviews. 68:219-243.[Persian] [Link]
  3. Ghasemi A (2016). Analysis of causality in hume and its comparison with the views of Morteza Motahari. Hekmat Sadraei. 5(1):87-98. [Persian] [Link]
  4. Ghorbani Q (2007). Causality from the perspective of Western empiricists and its critique from the perspective of transcendental wisdom. New Religious Thought. 9:161-198.[Persian] [Link]
  5. Hume D (1969). A treatise of human nature. London: Penguin Book. [Link]
  6. Hume D (1988). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Chicago: Open Court. [Link]
  7. Maleki F (2021). Causality from Hume's perspective and its criticism based on the thought of Ibn Sina. Rushd Journal of Quranic Education and Islamic Studies. 116:31-32.[Persian] [Link]
  8. Nolan D (2005). David Lewis. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/UPO9781844653072]
  9. Sadr MB (1982). Logical bases for induction. Beirut: DAR AL TAAROF LELMATBUAT. [Arabic] [Link]
  10. Salem M (2012). The place of Sinai causality: A historical survey. Hekmat Sinai. 48:55-76. [Persian] [Link]
  11. Tabataba'i MH (2006). The end of wisdom. Qom: Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute Publication Center. [Arabic] [Link]
  12. Tabataba'i MH (2010). The beginning of wisdom. Qom: Islamic Publishing Institute. [Arabic] [Link]
  13. Tabataba'i MH (2011). Principles of philosophy and the method of realism. Tehran: Sadra Publications. [Persian] [Link]
Philosophical Thought
Volume 5, Issue 2 - Serial Number 18
Winter 2025
Pages 1001-1008