عنوان مقاله [English]
Inconsistent statements of authority are those that are presented on the basis of incompatibility of causal necessity and authority. The main purpose of these narrations is an appropriate explanation of authority without uncertainty and causal necessity, so that it does not require chance and coincidence and the person is responsible for the indefinite will and the resulting action. Among these lectures is the “theory of the authority of the soul” which has been proposed by some scholars of the principles of jurisprudence such as Mohaqiq Naini and Shahīd Ṣadr, and some contemporary philosophers such as Professor Fayyazi have tried to introduce it in the field of philosophical thought. The most important weakness of these statements is their lack of proper confrontation with philosophical principles and rules, including the rule of causal necessity; because most of these maladaptive statements require the refutation or particularization of rational rules. This article, after critically examining the most important statements of the theory of the authority (dominion, sovereignty) of the soul and expressing their drawbacks has reconstructed this theory and presented a new statement of it based on Mullā Ṣadrā’s philosophical principles, in which the drawbacks of other statements are no longer discussed.