Anthropology in psychology under the title of "personality theories" has been able to be effective in the field of behavioral studies and interpersonal relationships. The need to explain and analyze the true nature of man in the field of "being" - contrary to psychological personality theories that generally identify human nature in the field of "appearance" - caused this article based on Sadra's anthropological opinions and view According to Allport's trait theory, which is one of the pioneers of the trait (...) approach, it should be organized by descriptive-analytical method. The individualistic approach based on traits is the main feature of Allport's and Mulla Sadra's personality theory. The foundation of personality in both theories is based on the most profound characteristics of person; However, in the analysis of Mulla Sadra's philosophical texts, the quality of the appearance of these traits and why they influence the structure of personality and, accordingly, human behavior, have been explained. "Self" or ego, contrary to its abstract concept in Alport's view, is a real and existential thing in Sadrai's system. The dynamism and unity of Alporti's personality can be rationally explained by the rule of "unity of the known and the known" and "intrinsic volitional movement". (shrink)

Ethics is divided into three realms: Meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Utilitarianism is one of the most significant views in normative ethics, which acts as a true criterion to judge on human deeds in terms of loss and benefits of their consequences. In other words, utilitarianism judges on the amount of happiness for all the ones who have been influenced by that act. Utilitarianism itself is divided into two groups: act-utilitarianism, and rule-utilitarianism. The former concentrates on the amount of (...) goodness or happiness that an act creates in a particular situation and the latter considers the amount of goodness or happiness which results from a principle or rule. J.J.C. Smart is a pragmatist, and an advocate of act-utilitarianism. In this essay we have attempted to investigate some of the problems put forward on the problem of calculating the consequences of acts, then we explain the accepted principles by utilitarianists, and finally Smart’s responses to those problems. Instead of calculating the consequences as a response to these criticisms, Smart talks about comparison of two "Total Situation”, and by doing so he ignores the problem. In order to respond to all the criticisms on the calculation of utilitarianism, Smart, by differentiating between two types of evaluating and calculating consequences of an act and evaluating and calculating possible acts, attempts to appeal to the "Ripples on a Pond Model" and to the "Rules of Thumb" for cases which he is obliged to appeal to rules. (shrink)