مبانیِ فلسفیِ مفهومِ « خطا» در حقوق اروپایی و حقوق اسلامی و تاثیر آن در حقوق ایران

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم انسانی، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران.

2 دانشیار گروه حقوق بین الملل، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران.

چکیده

این مقاله به بررسی مبانی فلسفی مفهوم خطا در نظام‌های حقوقی و نظریه اخلاقی حاکم در حقوق ایران می-پردازد. برای نیل به این مقصود ابتدا به بررسی وظیفه‌گرایی و نتیجه گرایی به‌عنوان دو نظریه اخلاقی مسلط در فلسفه اخلاق و نظام‌های حقوقی اروپای قاره‌ای، حوزه انگلیسی‌زبان و اسلام پرداختیم. سپس جایگاه این دو نظریه اخلاقی را در حقوق ایران مورد بررسی قرار دادیم. سؤال اصلی این پژوهش این است که درست یا خطا بودن اعمال در نظام حقوقی ایران از چه امری ناشی می‌شود؟ فرض اساسی این پژوهش در پاسخ به سؤال اصلی این است که گرایش‌های اخیر فیلسوفان و حقوق‌دانان به سمت نظریه‌های تلفیقی است. به‌گونه‌ای که با ترکیب عناصر وظیفه‌گرایی (نقض تکلیف پیشین) و نتیجه گرایی (تجاوز به حق دیگری)، خطا را در عین نقض حق دیگری، نوعی نقض تکلیف قلمداد می‌کنند. در حقوق ایران شاهد ترکیبی ناهمگون از عناصر وظیفه‌گرایی و نتیجه گرایی در خصوص مفهوم خطا هستیم. نگارندگان برای رهایی از این وضعیت دو پیشنهاد ارائه می‌نمایند: پیشنهاد اول ارائه تعریفی واحد از مفهوم خطا با تلفیق عناصر قابل‌جمع وظیفه‌گرایی و نتیجه گرایی اخلاقی است. پیشنهاد دوم ارائه نظریه‌ای ابداعی موسوم به نتیجه گرایی عصب - زیست‌شناختی است که بر پایه آن خطا رفتار ناشی از داده‌ها و مؤلفه‌های ذهنی - مغزی محدود و نسبی فاعل در مواجهه با محرک‌های محیطی است درحالی‌که فرد در موقعیت مذکور امکان دسترسی به دلایل مناسب دیگر جهت‌گزینش تصمیمی غیر از رفتار خطا را داشته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Philosophical Foundations of the Concept of " Wrong" In european Law and Islamic Law and it,s effects in law of iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Esmaeil Keshavarz 1
  • Ali Mashhadi 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Law , Qom University, Qom, Iran.
چکیده [English]

This article examines the philosophical foundations of the concept of wrong in legal systems and the prevailing ethical theory in Iranian law. In order to achieve this goal, we first investigated deontologism and consequentialism as two dominant moral theories in the moral philosophy and legal systems of continental Europe, the English-speaking area, and Islam. The main question of this research is what is the basis of right or wrong actions in Iran's legal system? Then we examined the position of these two moral theories in Iranian law.The findings of the research indicate the recent tendencies of philosophers and jurists towards synthesis theories. In such a way that by combining the elements of Deontologism (breach of previous duty) and consequentialism (violation of another's right), they consider the wrong as a violation of duty while violating another's right. In Iranian law, we witness a heterogeneous combination of deontological and consequentialist elements regarding the concept of wrong. To get rid of this situation And in order to resolve this conflict, the authors offer two proposals: the first proposal is to provide a single definition of the concept of wrong by combining elements that can be collected, moral deontolgism and consequentialism.The second suggestion is to present an innovative theory called neurobiological consequentialism, based on which the behavior wrong is caused by data and Boundedand ,reletive mental-brain components of the subject in the face of environmental stimuli, while the person in the mentioned situation has the possibility of access to appropriate reasons in order to made a decision and choose other than wrong behavior

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Wrong
  • Bounded Rationality
  • Neurobiology
  • Deontology
  • Consequencialism
Altman, M. (2012), Behavioral Economics for Dummies, Mississauga: John Wiley & Sons.
Ahmadi,Babak(2014),The Text-structure and Textual Enterpretation,Tehran,Markaz press(in Persian)
AvdiRobert,Berman,Marshal(2000),Post modernity and postmodernism, translated by hosseinali Nozari.Naghshe Jahan press, Tehran(in Persian)
Ansari, Morteza, Al-Makasab, Vol. 3, The Heritage of Sheikh Al-Azam(in Arabic).
Babaei and Keshavarz, (2016), "The concept of error and its role in the classification structure of civil responsibility; Comparison of Roman Law, Common Law of Iran", Legal and Judicial Perspectives, Vol. 79 and 80. (in Persian).
Babaei, Iraj, Keshavarz, Ismail (2017), comparative study of the structure of civil liability in common law and Islam, Journal of Islamic and Western Law Research, No. 15.
Berea, Emil, (2005), History of Philosophy, translated by Ismail Saadat, Hermes Publishing. . (in Persian).
BNirks-peter- (1995)-consept of civil wrong-Pilosophical foundations of Tort Law-London-OxfordUnivercity press.
Boylan, M. (2019). Deontology with Selections from Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. In Teaching Ethics with Three Philosophical Novels (pp. 63-74). Springer, Cham. . (in Persian).
Bridge-Michael-1982”The Overlap of Tort and Contract”-WABASSO.
Capleston, Frederick (1985), History of Philosophy, Volume 8, translated by Bahauddin Khorramshahi, Scientific and Cultural Publication.. (in Persian).
Cartledge, P., Millett, P., & Todd, S. (Eds.). (1990). Nomos: essays in Athenian law, politics and society. Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, C., 1959. Criminal Responsibility and the Knowledge of Right and Wrong. U. Miami L. Rev., 14, p.30.
Copleston, Frederick, (2013), History of Philosophy, Volume I, Greece and Rome, translation: Mojtboi, Seyyed Jalaluddin, Scientific and Cultural Publications, 2013. . (in Persian)
Darwall, Stephen(ed.) (2003), Deontology, First edition, London: Blackwell Publishing-l3.
Darwall, Stephen-2003), Consequentialism, First edition, London: Blackwell Publishing.
Descheemaeker ,Eric. (2012). the Roman Division of Wrongs: A New Hypothesis-University of Edinburgh,School of Law, and February 10, 2012.
Descheemaeker, E -2012-“ The Roman Division of Wrongs: A New Hypothesis”- University of Edinburgh – Edinburgh- School of Law- February 10.
Elster, J. (1991), Rationality and Social Norms, European Journal of Sociology, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 109-129.
Elster,J,2009,Reason and Rationality (Steven Rendall, Trans.) , Princeton Princeton University Press.
Engelen, B. (2005), The Politics-Economics-Ethics Continuum Revisited, Romanian Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 60-69.
Etrak, Hossein (2009), Moral Dutyism, Ethics in Science and Technology, No. 1 and 2.
Etrak, Hossein, (2007) Moral duties in the view of David Ross, Mirror of Knowledge.
Etrak, Hossein, (2013), a new interpretation of result-oriented taskism, Philosophical Reflections, No. 9.
Fakhri, Majed, (Translator), Memarian, Jahandad, (Translator), (2005), Ethics in Islamic Philosophy, Information Center of Islamic Culture and Communication Organization, 1384.. (in Persian).
Farughi, Mohammad Ali, (1998), The Path of Wisdom in Europe, Alborz Publishing.. (in Persian).
Frankena, William (1376), Moral Philosophy, Hadi Sadeghi, Tehran, Taha.
Fried, C. (1976). Right and Wrong--Preliminary Considerations. The Journal of Legal Studies, 5(2), 165-200.
Gazzaniga, MICHAEL S, (2009), The Cognitive Neurosciences, The MIT Press.
Gibins,John(2015),the Policy of Postmodernity,Tranlated by Ansari Mansur,Tehran, Game no press(in Persian)
Ghazali, Muhammad, (1417 A.H.) , al-Mustafafi fi ilm al-usul, Beirut, Al-Rasalah Institute. (in Arabic).
Greene, J., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). For the Law, Neuroscience Changes Nothing and Everything. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences.
Greene, J., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). For the Law, Neuroscience Changes Nothing and Everything. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences
Greiner, D. J. (2019). The New Legal Empiricism & Its Application to Access-to-Justice Inquiries. Daedalus, 148(1), 64-74.
Haghighi,Shahrokh,Transition from Modernity?,Nietzsche ,Foucault , Lyotard   ,  Derrida , Agah press  ,Tehran (in Persisn)   
Hajjati Shurki, Seyed Mohammad, Afari, Abbas, (2013) Kant's moral obligationism in critique, Ethical Knowledge, No. 15.
Hall, Jeromy, (1943) Interrelation of Criminal Law and Tort, Columbia Law Review.
Hosseinzadeh, Mohammad, (2017), review and criticism of Rabatkin's view on free will, Shiraz University Religious Thought Quarterly, No. 3.
Ibn Sina, (1374), Explanation of Signs and Punishments, Qom, Al-Balagha.
Javid,Mohamad Javid, (2007), " Fundement philosophiques du droitnaturel clasique" ,Revue Irannienne de Droit Constitutionnel,Nº8.. (in Persian).
Kaczorowski,Robert,Common law background of nineteenth century tort law,Fordham law school,1990.
Kant, Immanuel, (1983), our foundation after nature of ethics, translator: Hamid Enayat, Khwarazmi publishing company. . (in Persian).
Katouzian, Nasser, (2008), requirements outside the contract - first volume: civil responsibility , Tehran University Press.. (in Persian).
Kelly, John, (2003), A Brief History of Legal Theory in the West, translated by Rasakh, Mohammad, New Design Publications.. (in Persian) .
Kenneth W Simons, (1996). Deontology, Negligence, Tort, and Crime, University of California.
Keshavarz, Ismail, (2018), Civil Liability Structure, Majd Publications.. (in Persian).
Magee, Brian, (1999), Great Philosophers; Acquaintance with Western Philosophy, translated by Izatollah Foulad Vand-Nashar Khawarizmi.. (in Persian).
Mahmoudi Janaki, Firoz, (2013), Basics, Principles and Methods of Criminalization, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Tehran.
Maraghei, Mir Abdul Fattah (1417 AH), Al-Anaween al-Faqhiyyah, Al-Nashar al-Islami Institute, Qom. (in Arabic)
McCartney,S.&Parent,R. (2015).Ethics inlaw nforcement.Victoria,BC BCcampus. Retrived from, ttp://opentextbc.ca/ethicsin
Misbah Yazdi, (1384), review of moral schools, Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute, Qom.
Misselbrook, D. (2013). Duty, Kant, and deontology. Br J Gen Pract, 63(609), 211-211.
Mohadi, Mohammad Javad, (1389), Examining the relationship between task orientation and consequentialism, Philosophical Researches.
Monsengwo, L., & Pasinya, L. M. (2005). La notion de nomos dans le Pentateuque grec (Vol. 52). Gregorian Biblical BookShop.
Mousavi Khomeini Ruhollah Mousavi Khomeini (1983), Tahrir al-Wasila, Qom: Qom seminary seminary community, Islamic publications office. (in Arabic).
Mozaheri Saif, Hamidreza, (2008), "Consequentialist ethics: in search of the dimensions of Islamic morals" Pagah Hozha 2017 number 245.. (in Persian).
Nadimi, (1402), Conclusionism in Islamic ethics from the point of view of Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi, Ethical Knowledge, No. 33.
Nadimi, Mehrdad, Masoudi, Jahangir, (1401) Consequentialism in ethics from the perspective of Islamic teachings, Ahlak Vahiani, No. 2.
Najafi, Mohammad Hasan, (1413 AH), Jawaharlal Kalamfi, Commentary on Islamic Laws, Dar Ihya Al-Trath Al-Arabi-Beirut. (in Arabic).
Novak, George, (2004), Empiricist Philosophy, translated by Parviz Babaei, Azadmehr Publishing. . (in Persian).
Opderbeck,David, (2014)The Problem with NeuroLaw, Saint Louis University Law Journal,vol58,no2,p497-540.
Qari Seyyed Fatemi, Seyed Mohammad and Ali Mashhadi, (2008), "Developments in the Theory of Modern Natural Law", Legal Research Quarterly, Qom University, No. 2.. (in Persian).
Renani, Mohsen and others (2016). Criticism of rational choice from the point of view of competing approaches: Economic Studies Quarterly, No. 73.
Rickaby, J. (1923). Moral philosophy: Ethics, deontology and natural law. Longmans, Green.
Ross, W.D., (2002),The Right and The Good,Oxford University pres.
Sadeghi, Hassan (2013), Reasons for the intrinsic and rational goodness and ugliness of verbs, Theological Knowledge, No. 3, pp. 114-95.
Searle, J. R. (2007). Freedom and Neurobiology: Reflections on Free Will, Language, and Political Power. Columbia University Press.
Sharifi, Ahmad Hossein (2008) What is good? Which one is bad?, Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute, Qom.
Shatbi, (1422 AH), Al-Mawafaat fi Usul al-Sharia, second volume. Beirut. (in Arabic).
Shirvani, Ali, (2000), "The overall structure of Islamic ethics", Qobsat magazine fall 1378 - number 13.. (in Persian).
Shirvani, Ali, (2014) Examining the moral goal from Ibn Sina's point of view, Ayin Hikmat, No. 24.
Simons,K,2008: The Crime/Tort Distinction: Legal Doctrine and Normative Perspectives, Widener Law Journal, Vol.17, No.3,  pp.719-732.
Taftazani, Saad al-Din (1409 AH), Sharh al-Maqasid, Vol. 4, Al-Sharif al-Razi, Qom.
 Jurjani, Ali bin Muhammad (1413 AH), Sharh al-Masatiq, Volume 8, Al-Sharif al-Razi, Qom.
Taghedisi, Mohammad, (2008), "Analysis and review of utilitarianism and its criticism from the perspective of Islamic ethics", Master's thesis in moral philosophy at Qom University.. (in Persian).
TannsjÖ, TorbjÖrn (2002), Understanding Ethics, First edition, Edinburg Edinburg University Press.
Tomlinson,e, Tort Liability in france for the act of things,Louisiana Law Review,Vol48,no6,1988.
Tunc,A(1979),Louisiana Law Review,A Codified Law of tort,The French Experience,Vol39.
Wakes, Raymond, (2009), Philosophy of Law, translated by Baqer Ansari and Muslim Aghaei Touq, Jangal Publishing House.
Yazdaniyan-Alireza (2006), General rules of civil liability, first volume, Nashmirizan-. (in Persian).
Zamani, Mohammad Hassan and Qiamuddin, (2013) "Comparative study of the objectives of the Sharia", Habal al-Mattin Quarterly, 3rd period, 6th issue, spring issue.. (in Persian).
Zimmermann, Reinhard. (1996). Law of obligation, Roman Fuondation of civil Tradition, Oxford.
Zimmermann-Reinhard- (1996)-Law of  obligation-Roman Fuondation of civil Tradition-London-Oxford Univercity press
دوره 9، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 17
در حال صفحه آرایی و بارگزاری فایل های PDF
فروردین 1404
  • تاریخ دریافت: 08 شهریور 1402
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 08 اسفند 1402
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 03 اردیبهشت 1403