Motivation in general and moral motivation, in particular, has been highly-discussed subject among psychologists and philosophers. The question of what mental states necessarily lead to moral behaviors has received various answers. Motivational internalists about moral judgement have argued that moral judgements necessitate moral behaviors. Among them, sensationalists take moral judgements to be expressions of emotions, whereas internalists about moral beliefs entertain the thought that moral judgements are expressions of moral beliefs. On the contrary, Motivational externalists about moral beliefs speak of the conceivability of an individual who has a moral belief but due to a lack of desire to act morally, individual is not motivated to act upon her/his belief (the case of amoralist). Furthermore, Motivational internalists hold that amoralism is more than a mere intellectual possibility; they take the case of “ psychopathy” as a realization of this abstract possibility. They claim that empirical findings of Blair’ s studies on psychopath prisoners provide counter-evidence to the externalist thought that psychopaths are threats to internalism. Among advocates of Motivational internalism, Sinnott-Armstrong has used Blair’ s empirical findings along with a philosophical argument (argument from an analogy between morality and art) to establish that psychopathy is not a threat to internalism. The present study is an attempt to reveal that (a) Sinnott-Armstrong’ s argument is not effective, and (b) Motivational internalism relies on a false premise.

The conventional tripartite definition of knowledge represents it as "true justified belief" and implies that three conditions are necessary to know something namely truth, justification and belief. Here justification has proved to be more controversial than the other two. Epistemologists usually recognize only two types namely doxastic and situational. This is where the Audi's categorization stands out; he proposes four types and speaks of propositional and structural types as well. Structural Justification is an Innovation and the result of Audi's internalist view in justification. internalism and externalism are two rival views for explaining epistemology and justification. Audi Believes in Accessibilism weak internalism in justification and Structural Justification is the conclusion of his special internalist approach to justification. Given that one of the major criticisms leveled at internalism rests upon its indefinite and mental nature, Audi’ s formulation of a definite mental process leading to doxastic justification has successfully reinforced the internalists’ stance. In this research, content analysis method has been used.

Bernard Williams in his “Internal and External Reasons” argues for internalism about reasons. He holds that according to internalism of reasons, agent A has reason to Φ if and only if he has a desire ψ which will be satisfied by Φ-ing and he also believes that it is so. Williams maintains that if one does not have a preceding desire and cannot form any desires through deliberation then it will be rational to claim that he does not have reason to Φ. Clearly desires play a crucial role here because if an agent does not have such desires, then he does not have reasons for action. Williams goes beyond this claim and says only internal reasons are reasons for action. In this article, we argue against his claim. After explaining descriptive and normative senses of rationality and alternative views regarding the rationality of beliefs and desires, in virtue of the idea of blameworthiness, responsibility, and having practical reason, we show that there are a set of actions for which moral agents are blameworthy and they, therefore, have reasons at least for certain actions which are not dependent upon their desires. This idea would be supported by the facts that most people consider a person who violates hedonic, prudential, and moral norms as much as possible to be irrational, that they consider the act of counting him as rational to be counterintuitive, and finally that societies have founded institutions for restraining such a person.Our argument from blameworthiness can be formulated as follows:(1) If a moral agent performs an action X for which he can justly be blamed, then he will be responsible and he ought not to perform X (the concept of blameworthiness entails responsibility).(2) If a moral agent is responsible and he ought not to perform X, then there is a reason for him not to perform X (responsibility entails having reason).(3) There are a set of actions, S, that moral agents can be justly blamed for performing.(4) So moral agents are responsible for performing an action in S (from 1 and 3).(5) So there are reasons for moral agents not to perform an action in S (from 2 and 4).By falsifying the negation of premise (3), we show that (3) is true. To falsify that it is not the case that there are actions for which moral agents can be justly blamed, we presented an example of an extremely immoral, imprudent, and pain-seeking agent who forms abnormal desires and acts against moral, prudent, and hedonic norms as much as possible. Since there are not any desires for such norms in his psychology, and his actions are based on these desires, he is not regarded as rational by most people and social institutions such as psychiatric clinics and courts. In addition, it would be irrational to hold that he is rational in his having immoral, imprudent, and pain-seeking desires and acting accordingly because it is a rational, prevalent, conventional practice to believe so and any theory which denies its rationality should provide convincing reasons.

In her 2014 paper "internalism About Reasons: Sad But True? ", Kate Manne defends a version of internalism about normative reasons for actions. She starts by considering the interpersonal context of reasons to emphasize how reasons are limited by psychological states of the agent. Then, she defends a necessary condition for reasons; i. e., Ideal Reasoning Thesis, which every theory of reason should satisfy. However, she claims, externalism fails to do so. On the contrary, we suggest that it is not clear whether the process of Ideal Reasoning happens in an ideal or non-ideal time. Furthermore, it seems preferable to take time to be ideal too. Clearing the ambiguity about time makes externalism able to satisfy Ideal Reasoning Thesis and, thus, the argument for internalism fails.

What is required for a belief to be justified? How are we justified in holding belief about external world? Contrary to externalism, the internalist foundationalism believes that, there are epistemic or intellectual duties or obligations to be fulfilled before one assent to justified propositional beliefs. The purpose of this paper is to criticize Chisholm’s internalism.Though internalist theory is more plausible than its rivals, it is not sufficient for justification of beliefs, and needs some complementary account to be sufficient for a belief to be rationally justified. I will show that there are some problems in Chisholm's approach to justification of beliefs. Since the majority of our knowledge is knowledge by representaion, we need to have a connective bridge between subject and objects.From Sadra’s philosophy, I will offer a connective bridge between subject and external object trough the mental form theory. By conforming to knowledge by presence we may have a straightforward account of justification of beliefs about the physical world, in particular sensory experience.

The key role of Motivational factors in L2/FL learning is acknowledged since longtime; and recognition of Motivational features of language learners is very important in order to adopt appropriate training methods and to compile more effective educational resources. The aim of this research was comparing the Motivational factors among Chinese and Lebanese Persian learners based on L2 Motivational Self System theory of Dornyei and the Possible Selves theory of Markus and Nurius. This study intended to respond to 2 questions: 1-Is the Motivational level of Chinese learners higher than Lebanese learnersin Motivational factors including the ideal L2 self, the ought-to L2 self, the L2 learning experience, the intended effort, the instrumentality-promotion items and the attitudes to L2 culture and community? 2-Is the Motivational level of Lebanese group higher than Chinese group in anxiety, the L2 willingness to communicate in class, and the effect of instrumentality-prevention items? Since the middle of 20 century, the L2/FL Motivational studies were mainly based on Gardner and his colleagues' ideas (Gardner & Lambert, 1959; 1972; Gardner & Macintyre, 1993; Gardner & Tremblay 1994). And some specific terms were used by experts such as integrative-instrumental motivation, and later, intrinsic-extrinsic motivation. But at the end of the century, some imperfections of Gardner's model were revealed and it was determined that the person's imaginations, mental representations and beliefs of himself have a great effect on motivation of his activities. The theory of Possible Selves represents individuals' beliefs of what they might become, what they would like become, what they are obliged to become, and what they are afraid of becoming. Possible selves derive from representations of the self in the past and they include representation of the self in the future. Each individual creates sets of different possible selves in his psyche, according to his personal experiences and the effects of relatives, society, media, and etc. Possible selves represent specific individual hopes, fears and fantasies of the person (Markus &Nurius, 1986; Rocher-Hahlin, 2014). In the early 2000s, Dornyei and his colleagues integrated Gardner, Higgins, Markus&Nurius's ideas and presented the L2 Motivational System which is one of the most modern theories for studying the L2/FL motivation. This theory contains 3 main concepts: 1. The ideal L2 self, 2. the Ought-to L2 self and 3. The L2 learning experience. In this paper, in addition to these 3 Motivational factors of Dornyei's theory, we studied 6 other Motivational factors, based on possible selves concept, which were: 4. The intended effort, 5. The instrumentality-prevention items, 6. The instrumentality-promotion items, 7. The attitudes to L2 culture and community, 8. The L2 willingness to communicate in class and 9. The anxiety The statistical population of the research included at first 77 persons (37 Chinese and 40 Lebanese learners), but finally 2 groups of 33 persons of them were selected. The Lebanese students were all the Persian learners of the Persian Language Center of Imam Khomeini International University, with high school diploma or bachelor degree from Lebanon, who wanted to continue studying in different academic disciplines in Iran, after learning the Persian language. Chinese learners were all the students of Persian language and literature of Xi'an University in China 22 persons of whom had come to Persian Language Center for their third year of study, while 11 other ones stayed in China. The instrument of research was a questionnaire with 36 questions based on previous researches of Taguchi et al. (2009), Papi&Teimouri (2012) and Atarsharghi &Akbari (2019) with some modificatios. The data of 66 questionnaires were analyzed by SPSS 22 software. The demographic information about age and sex of each group was shown in Tables 2 and 3; and Figures 1 and 2. The results of calculating the Chronbach's alpha coefficient for each factor and for the whole questionnaire was in an optimal and acceptable range (ɑ > 0/7), and the reliability of research instrument was approved (see Table 1). The results showed that there were significant differences in all of the Motivational factors, except anxiety, among Chinese and Lebanese learners, and the Motivational level of Chinese students was higher than the other group. But there was not significant difference regarding the anxiety factor. The highest and the lowest averages of indices belonged to the ideal L2 self and the anxiety for Chinese students respectively, while for Lebanese learners the respective factors were the Instrumentality-prevention items and the ideal L2 self.

Motivational values are a factor influencing the use of integrated reporting. The purpose of this study is to help explain the concept of integrated reporting and use value-added as a practical, appropriate and useful tool for companies to use the concept of integrated reporting and provide a model of the impact of Motivational values on its implementation. The method of the present study is descriptive-survey. The statistical population of the present study is managers, financial managers and auditors in 1399, of which 203 people have been selected. The tool used in the research is a questionnaire and in order to analyze the data, the structural equation model using LISREL software has been used.Since Motivational values are a factor influencing the disclosure of information based on integrated reporting, and given that Motivational values include values based on individual interests and values based on public interest, the findings suggest that the principles of integrated reporting are based on values based on In the public interest.Based on the findings of this study, Motivational values are a factor affecting the preparation and presentation of value added form as one of the tools of integrated reporting. So that people with Motivational values based on public interest are more inclined to integrate reporting.