Afarand Journals

Philosophical Thought

eISSN : 0000-0000
10.5
citescore
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years
10.5
impact factor
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
pubmed
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
Embase
Biosis Preview
Volume 4, Issue 2 (2024)                   J Clin Care Skill 2024, 4(2): 91-107 | Back to browse issues page

Print XML PDF HTML

‎ 10.58209/jpt.4.2.91

History

Received: 2024/01/3 | Accepted: 2024/06/23 | Published: 2024/07/18
How to cite this article
Karimi S, Aghajani M. Human Interests from the Perspective of Rule Utilitarianism and Expediency Jurisprudence. J Clin Care Skill 2024; 4 (2) :91-107
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-6-73231-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Human Interests from the Perspective of Rule Utilitarianism and Expediency Jurisprudence
Authors S. Karimi *1 , M. Aghajani2
1- Department of Moral Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Religions and Denominations, Qom, Iran
2- Department of Fiqh and Usul, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran
* Corresponding Author Address: University of Religions and Denominations, Beginning of Shahid Molavi Boulevard, Imam Sadegh (AS) Boulevard, Pardisan, Qom. Postal Code: 3749113357 (karimiyahosein@gmail.com)
Abstract   (3125 Views)
Interests are divided into three categories of validity; valid, invalid, and unrestricted. Utilitarianism is divided into two categories: act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. In act utilitarianism, the greatest benefit for the greatest number of individuals is weighed according to specific situations, while in rule utilitarianism, adherence to moral rules is considered without exception. In expediency jurisprudence, one must act according to the rules, but in some specific cases, lower interests must be sacrificed to preserve higher interests. In rule utilitarianism, one must proceed according to the rules, and the rule is not subject to exceptions. The temporal criteria of interest, the material and spiritual nature of interests, and the consideration and non-consideration of religion and otherworldly interests are among the differences between utilitarianism and expediency jurisprudence. On the other hand, the principle of the primacy of repelling harm over attracting benefit has also been reinterpreted based on negative utilitarianism.
Keywords:
Rule Utilitarianism, Negative Utilitarianism, Expediency, Unrestricted Interests, Higher Interests, Moral Rules
|   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (10 Views)