Abstract:
منسیوس (Mencius) و فارابی نمایندگان برجسته دو سنت فکری مهم شرقی یعنی فلسفه کنفوسیوسی- چینی و فلسفه اسلامی-ایرانی هستند که تأملات اساسی درباره ماهیت و کار ویژه‌های دولت و چگونگی اخلاقی کردن کارآمد آن داشته‌اند و می‌توانند نقاط ضعف یکدیگر را پوشش دهند و الگویی امروزی با ارجاع به سنت تمام شرقی پدید آورند. سؤال اساسی مقاله نحوه نگرش این دو فیلسوف سیاسی نسبت به همجوشی‌های اخلاق و سیاست در ساحت دولت و چگونگی ترسیم دولت اخلاقی است. فرضیه مبتنی بر مفصل‌بندی اخلاق و سیاست در مفاهیم مدینه فاضله، سعادت، مشروعیت و عدالت و تکوین دولت اخلاقی از منظر منسیوس و فارابی و شباهت عمده آنان در رویکرد کلی است که بر پایه روش بررسی تطبیقی دارای اشتراکات فراوان و افتراقات قابل‌ذکر و نقاط قوت و ضعف هستند. دولت، خیر ضروری، پیوستگی و یگانگی اخلاق و سیاست، دولت ابزاری و حداکثری/تأمین اجتماعی جامع/تأمین امنیت-رفاه-فضیلت، دولت حکیم-شهریار، ارتباط میان دیانت، سیاست, معنویت و اخلاق، سعادت امری چندجانبه و چندبعدی/دست‌یابی به سعادت امری نسبی، مشروعیت دوپایه آسمانی زمینی، اعتدال و حد وسط/مخالفت با اغلب و غیراخلاقی بودن آن/و عدالت جامع اشتراکات این دو است. برقراری تعادل میان رویکرد نخبه‌گرایانه و توده گرایانه از سوی منسیوس،صراحت بیشتر بر ابزاری بودن دولت/ و لحاظ حق انقلاب، تأکید بیشتر بر وظایف دولت/دولت خیرخواه و خادم، توصیف تجربی-عقلانی-جزئی، سعادت جامع میان فطرت و اراده، نقش مردم فراتر از نظریه فارابی/صدای مردم صدای خدا، و تأکید بیشتر بر عدالت سیاسی از تفاوت‌های منسیوس با فارابی در عرصه دولت اخلاقی می‌توان برشمرد.
Mencius and Farabi are prominent representatives of two important Eastern intellectual traditions, namely Confucian-Chinese philosophy and Islamic-Iranian philosophy, who had basic reflections on the nature and functions of the state and how to moralize it efficiently. The basic question of the article is the attitude of these two political philosophers towards the fusion of ethics and politics in the state and how to draw the moral state. The hypothesis is based on the elaboration of ethics and politics in the concepts of utopia, prosperity, legitimacy and justice and the formation of the moral state from the perspective of Mencius and Farabi and their major similarity in the general approach, which, based on the comparative research method, has many commonalities and noteworthy differences. Government, essential good, continuity and unity of ethics and politics, instrumental and maximal government/comprehensive social security/providing security-welfare-virtue, Hakim-Shahriar government, relationship between religion, politics, spirituality and ethics, happiness is a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional matter/achievement Happiness is a relative matter, the legitimacy of the heavenly and earthly duality, moderation and middle ground/opposition to its excess and immorality/and comprehensive justice are the commonalities of these two. Establishing a balance between the elitist and populist approach by Mencius, more clarity on the instrumentality of the state/and in terms of the right of revolution, more emphasis on the duties of the government/servant government, empirical-rational-detailed description, comprehensive happiness between nature and will, the role of the people Beyond Farabi's theory/the voice of the people is the voice of God, and more emphasis on political justice, the differences between Menisos and Farabi in the field of moral government can be enumerated.Mencius, a great thinker and philosopher of East Asia, and Farabi, a thinker and a high-level philosopher of West Asia, are two examples of treasures that the explanation of their opinions in the field of government can increase the connection between these two rich and deep traditions. In this research, an attempt has been made to analyze the fields related to ethics and politics, which are the components of the term called political ethics, and based on this, to clarify the similarities and differences between the two. Mensus, like Farabi, who is the second teacher in the philosophical tradition of Islam, can be called the second teacher in the Confucian tradition. He explained and explained and of course invented and theorized in the school of Confucius and is considered the closest interpreter of Confucius to him.Like Aristotle, Mencius and Farabi believed that man is a political animal and can only fully expand these relationships when he is inside the state and society. He considers the government to be a moral institution and they believe that its head should be a moral leader. According to these two philosophers, the distribution of charity among all the members of Madinah is based on the eligibility of people. Charities include officials and positions, security, health, dignity and status, sanctity, property, wealth and the like. Therefore, all citizens have rights, and everyone has the right to have a job and work suitable to their social personality.Unlike today's political philosophy in the West, Farabi does not believe in the separation of public and private spheres and considers them to be the same. The similarity between Al-Farabi and Mencius is the special prominence of political philosophy in the thoughts of these two. But in this field, the difference between the two is also clear. While Farabi follows political philosophy in the form of political wisdom in theory. Mencius seeks political wisdom in the public arena.According to Mencius and Farabi, a good, efficient and superior government is the result of the combination of ethics and politics. Based on this, the work of a good government should start from the people and go up, not from the ruling class and go down. People are not only the root but also the last judge of the government. Utopia, which is an ideal society, is realized when ethics and politics are combined. Happiness is multifaceted and multidimensional. Learning the benevolence of the community and the people is the extension of justice. Justice is realized when people have the ability and power to exercise sovereignty and can criticize the government and, if necessary, criticize it or correct it. In response to this question, Mencius considers the government a moral institution and believes that its head should be a moral leader.
(
, 
, 
)
