The Man’s Freedom and free will from the Point Of View of Muslim Philosophers (Published)
Freedom is of the fundamental issues related to the human and its social life, which is discussed under different titles. Man is characterized with an independent, wise and free character; the desire and feeling for freedom are inherent; in the road of life, the man is dominated by nothing preventing fulfillment of his will since God created him wise and free. The man’s voluntary evolution indicating its character and talent flourishing represents its freedom. According to Muslim philosophers’ view, the man’s freedom is essential for happiness; this necessity stems from Fitra and is the result of speech and other habits; as he is responsible for its own prosperity or adversity. Freedom, indeed, is the possibility and ability of utilizing and the will’s objective interpretation along being. It is implicitly defined as getting free from bondage and others’ dominance. Social freedom also comes from the authority view in which the man tries to fulfill his will in the society in order to remove existing constraints. Thus, in Islamic view, freedom is realized in three steps of internal freedom (intellectual and mental), external freedom (freedom in will’s objective realization) and social freedom (lack of acquiesce before social idols). Freedom in this interpretation is the divine evolution and forgery, which is non-assignable, nontransferrable and non-granted; further, it is considered as the basic fundamental of personality formation and development of the individual and society.
Pretending To Be Free: Oliver Wendell Holmes As a Victorian Revolutionary (Review Completed - Accepted)
Skeptical of Truth and of its assumed relation to public policy, Oliver Wendell Holmes tended to approve of legislation so long as it adhered to proper procedures. He had no need, unlike is great colleague Brandeis, to evaluate the substance of legislative acts. The entire process, irrational in its premises, was sufficient unto itself. He presumed the legislature reflected the public will, almost always devoid of reason. The judiciary’s sole role was to assess the legislature’s adherence to the rules of legislative procedure as laid out in the Constitution. Judges were arbiters of the rules not of the wisdom of legislation