نسبی گرایی

There are notable similarities between the later thought of Wittgenstein on language games and grammar, and Kuhn's idea of the incommensurability of scientific paradigms, which have led to comparative studies between the two. One of the issues both philosophical perspectives confront is relativism, and there are numerous problems that relativism raises for a philosophical idea. A common aspect of the ideas of these two philosophers is the centrality of conceptual and linguistic frameworks concerning issues such as meaning, understanding, and truth. This aspect has drawn attention from certain interpretations that consider Wittgenstein and Kuhn as proponents of relativism. Here, I will examine the issue of relativism, focusing on its challenges for understanding and truth, centering on the works of two interpreters of Wittgenstein and Kuhn: Hans Glock and Moyal-Sharrock. There are similarities and differences in the interpretations of Wittgenstein and Kuhn between these two interpreters. From the author's perspective: (1) Neither Kuhn's incommensurability nor Wittgenstein's idea of grammar prevents understanding between two paradigms or linguistic frameworks. (2) There is a disagreement between Wittgenstein and Kuhn regarding the precedence of language on one hand, and mental classifications on the other. (3) Wittgenstein's idea of common behavior of mankind does not lead to relativism in truth. Based on these three positions, the interpretations of Wittgenstein and Kuhn by Glock and Moyal-Sharrock have been criticized.

Although relativism is inherently a philosophical and epistemological issue, empirical sciences are also directly (less so) and indirectly (more so) related to relativism, a relationship that has significantly increased in contemporary times. Among modern empirical sciences, experimental cognitive sciences have directly addressed the issue of cognition. Accordingly, this article aims to demonstrate that the prevailing trend in experimental cognitive sciences clearly indicates and supports relativism, despite the challenges and controversies surrounding the interpretation of many empirical findings related to relativism. Consequently, epistemologists who seek to refute relativism should also consider the strong evidence presented in favor of relativism, which has received less attention in epistemology—both in its common and philosophical senses.

The aim of the presenting research here, is to answer the main question whether or not it is possible to draft an Eastern Charter of Human Rights, considering the components of human rights relativism. The results finally indicate that some human rights rules nowadays have acquired the value of peremptory norms of international law, nor it is possible to change them. However, other rules can be changed through an Eastern Charter of Human Rights. Today, the majority of Eastern states and governments disagree with the application of international human rights regulations, to the extent that they demand the drafting of new laws in the field of human rights, one of the main manifestations of which is in the area of an Eastern Charter of Human Rights. Overall, it must be pointed out that, for sure, drafting an Eastern Charter of Human Rights is not easy given the numerous cultural diversities that exist in Eastern countries, but it can be advanced based on the principle of cultural relativism. It is obvious that in drafting the Eastern Charter of Human Rights, the main goal might be non-interference in the internal affairs of states- countries accordance with the human rights situation, which is one of the main grievances and criticisms that Eastern countries have of Western countries in this regard.

In their exploration of normative sciences (such as practical wisdom and jurisprudence in traditional sciences and ethics and economics in modern sciences), both al-Farabi and Hilary Putnam find destructive or generative influences of metaphysics to be obvious. They both believe that neglecting these roles that metaphysics plays will lead to irreparable effects. According to al-Farabi, metaphysics plays an indispensable role in how the normative disciplines use knowledge; thus, for al-Farabi, excluding metaphysics implies the exclusion of the foundations of some disciplines, the rejection of objectivity in values, and falling into relativism. In contrast, Putnam rejects traditional metaphysics and seeks to remove it from normative sciences. Thus, he introduces an alternative for the role that traditional metaphysics plays in normative sciences. This alternative is her specific narrative that he offers from pragmatist philosophy. In this narrative, Putnam considers pragmatism a kind of metaphysics without borders that criticizes and reforms other philosophies. In this new perspective, Putnam presents another picture of normative sciences as well as a criterion for objectivity and relativism. This research benefits from logical-philosophical analysis, including content, statement, and system analysis through a comparative approach to the ideas of these two philosophers.

Allameh Tabatabai (1360-1289), as a contemporary philosopher and commentator,   he explained and analyzed the new issues of ethic philosophy according to Islamic principles .The subject of this article is the relationship between nature and ethics from Allameh's point of view and the descriptive-analytical research method based on the text. Check the Allameh Tabatabai's point of view about determining the origin of moral values showing that without believing in common human nature , talking about human values is meaningless and denying of moral nature means accepting the relativity of values and actually denying morality.Despite the claims of those who believe in morality which is independent of religion, the weakening of the basis of religious beliefs and the relativism of all human knowledge made it impossible to reasonably defend moral values. According to Allameh, in the two moral systems, the Greek moral system and the religious system, It is inevitable to accept the judgments of practical reason, which is based on the judgment of the goodness and badness of actions, and in the monotheistic system of the Qur'an, the reliance of ethics on nature and religion is more obvious.

The validity of human knowledge depends on the validity of the principle of human cognition, and therefore, defending the reality of human knowledge is considered the most important issue of epistemology. The most famous theory in explaining the validity of human knowledge is naive realism, according to which the mind is merely passive in the process of cognition, like a mirror. This image has been challenged today, and in contrast to it, other theories have been formed based on the contribution of the mind in the process of cognition, which can be called structured epistemologies. The challenge for these theories is to maintain realism while going beyond naive realism. Allameh Tabataba'i, while presenting his own explanation of the Structuredness of perception, both from the perspective of the analysis of acquired knowledge and from the perspective of credit perceptions, also emphasizes realism. His model is based on the explanation of the non-uniformity of the relationship between the levels of human cognition and reality, in which all human cognition is directly or indirectly tied to reality.

Many Muslim philosophers in line with religious teachings discuss the idea of innate as a special existential structure for humans that differentiates their identity from their peers. Human’s innate draws a person to horizons beyond his animal nature and is a guide to a good life. Muslim philosophers solve some of the most important ethical issues and challenges by emphasizing the existential, epistemological, and even motivational features of human innate. In this article, it is explained how to take advantage of some features of human innate or divine identity, such as existential immateriality, immunity from error in innate knowledge, and benevolent and right-seeking tendencies of innate in solving the problems of ethics. The fact that human innate is the main origin of moral concepts, and a person understands such concepts without any experience from outside himself, and moral knowledge is general and cannot be rejected, because it comes from human innate, and therefore relativism in ethics is rejected, even if we have a subjective theory about moral meanings. In general, the theory of innate is used to justify ethics and moral obligations.

One of the important viewpoints in philosophy, especially in moral philosophy, is “relativism”. The critical and rational examination of relativism can lead to the right moral decisions and, accordingly, the right action in different circumstances. Richard Mervyn Hare is one of the prominent moral philosophers, who in his moral philosophy, speaking of relativism and realism, has expressed the criteria for the relativity of moral judgments. By using the rule of “generalizability”, he has tried to justify the moral judgments. Also, considering the role of practicing in using the moral principles according to the circumstances, he has tried to lead the moral agent to a skill that leads to the right moral action. Besides, in explaining his moral theory, Hare considers knowing the circumstances and teaching the moral principles as effective in making moral judgments, and finally, he links the foundations of his viewpoint to intuitive and critical thinking in order to strengthen it and to make it coherent. In this paper, we have tried to examine Hare’s viewpoint about relativism from a theoretical perspective.

The role and method of acquiring virtues has an important place in Aristotle's thought. He tries to achieve the human goal of acquiring virtues in a structured way. Contemporary Aristotelian Marta Nussbaum believes that some contemporary philosophers, although they consider themselves Aristotelians, have significant differences with him in a central point. Their mistake is having a relativistic approach to Aristotelian virtues. This approach is obviously incompatible with other views of Aristotle. Aristotle was a defender of an objective and unique description of human good or human happiness. Aristotle's virtue ethics has the ability to satisfy much of what relativists are looking for while also claiming objectivity, in that being relativistic based on a specific context does not mean relativism, as in other sciences. Like medicine and navigation, attention is paid to a specific field, and this does not mean relativism. According to Nussbaum, Aristotelian virtues can explain virtues better than virtues in the view of relativists, of course, when they carefully examine the background characteristics and pay attention to common and non-common characteristics in order to make the best choice. In this article, after expressing Nussbaum's view on Aristotelian virtues, we will examine three forms of his idea and finally we will clarify how virtues are non-relative in Aristotle's thought.

The later Wittgenstein presents all kinds of knowledge in the form of language games based on forms of life. One of the implications of his later views is that certain language games and forms of life are incommensurable. Since each person can know the world only through his/her own form of life and language game, those who subscribe to entirely different language games cannot have a proper understanding of the forms of life of others. They are not able to critique and evaluate their knowledge of reality unless they abandon their own customary forms of life and internalize other forms of life that they want to know about, that is, to become a member of a society based on those different forms of life. In contrast, Popper emphasizes the objective nature of knowledge by considering external reality as a major criterion of objectivity. Popper maintains that the growth of human knowledge takes place through a never-ending process of critical evaluation of previous knowledge claims and a continuous supply of new conjectures for capturing reality and their critical appraisal incessantly. In this article, following a brief description of the philosophical approaches of Wittgenstein and Popper (Sections 1 and 2), and a brief explanation of the anti-relativist attitude of critical rationalism (Section 3), we turn to a critical assessment of Wittgenstein's relativist approach through the prism of Critical Rationalism (Section 4). The last chapter of the article (Section 5) is dedicated to a brief recap of the topics discussed in the earlier sections.

The issue of professional socialization is very important in accounting. Failure to transfer professional values to accounting students may harm both the profession and its students. Individuals must adapt to all the values and norms of their chosen profession. Studying different aspects of professional socialization and the factors that affect it can provide a basis for improving the profession. The purpose of this paper is to study the relationship between ethical orientation and professional socialization of accounting student.                 

The present study is descriptive-correlational. The statistical population includes master's and doctoral students in accounting throughout the country. Accidental sampling method was used to select the statistical sample. Standard questionnaires were used to collect data. The extracted data from 284 questionnaires were analyzed using structural equations.

The results of the study confirm the significant relationship between ethical orientation and professional socialization. In other words, idealism is positively and significantly related to professional socialization, while the relationship between relativism and social socialization is negative and significant.

Due to the fact that students get acquainted with this profession through higher education system and ethical orientation has a significant relationship with the process of their socialization, so more effective educational interventions at the university level are necessary to improve and promote students' awareness of ethical issues and to pay attention to professional socialization.

The development and complexity of business activity raises various ethical issues that challenge auditors' ethical judgments. Professional identity and ethical orientation are among the factors that influence auditors' ethical judgment. Because the professional identity makes the auditors' attitudes and behaviors consistent with their professional roles, it brings their more ethical judgments, but this relationship can be under the influence of moral orientation. Therefore, the purpose of the present study is to investigate the effect of professional identity on moral judgment and to investigate the mediating role of moral orientation.

The present research method is descriptive-survey of correlation type. The statistical population is auditors working in private sector auditing institutions and the statistical sample is 437 community members who were selected by random sampling. The research data was collected using a questionnaire and the research hypotheses were tested using structural equations with the help of AMOS software.

The research results show that professional identity, in addition to having a direct relationship with moral judgment, is indirectly related to auditors' moral judgment through idealism and relativism. Also, professional identity has a positive relationship with idealism and a negative relationship with relativism. Idealism and relativism have a positive and negative relationship with moral judgment, respectively.

Through the identification of the components of the professional identity of independent auditors, the findings of the research provide a better understanding of the factors that are related to their ethical judgments and provide a model to improve their ethical judgments according to the prevailing environment. It offers suggestions on the business of the country.

Hermeneutics has been defined as "interpreting". Hermeneutics has faced many differences and conflicts in its tumultuous history, and the views of theorists on the mission of hermeneutics and its realm have varied widely. One of the most controversial issues in hermeneutics, which has even led to a fundamental shift in hermeneutic issues, was the ontological view of understanding, as regarded by Heidegger and Gadamer. They did not know the truth, as in previous periods, through the presentation of methods can be achieved. Philosophical hermeneutics believed in subjectivism; Prior to the emergence of this view, hermeneutics such as Schleiermacher and Delta sought to find a way to understand and to understand the correctly in terms of author and objectivity will be possible. Although ontological approach to the understanding of discourse are considered by many of twenty century philosophers, It also has been faced the criticism. Emilio Betty Warrick Hirsch defended objectivism in understanding texts with a critical and methodological view of understanding. This methodological approach is called methodological hermeneutics and the ontological approach is called philosophical hermeneutics. In this article, we try to explain the objectivist methodological hermeneutics through a library method and, referring to Heidegger and Gadamer's views, address the most important critiques of Hirsch in the subjective approach of philosophical hermeneutics.

The relationship between rationality and morality is one of significant issues in philosophy that has been discussed since a long time ago. The spread of moral relativism and belief in instrumental rationality challenge this basic principle that nothing is given priority -or should be given priority- unless it has some merit to be prioritized. The present article is a research study on the philosophical attempts made by Nicholas Rescher to defend rationality of ends against instrumentalist views of rationality.

In this research study, besides data collection and extracting relevant information to the subject under study, research fiches were accurately made and then analyzed using comparative classification and thematic coding. The method of data extraction is library research and the analytic-argumentative method was used for inferring the results and answering the questions.

Rescher believes that inattention to rationality of evaluation results in an impaired understanding of rationality and leads to part/whole fallacy. To him, rationality is of three types: rationality of beliefs, rationality of actions, and rationality of evaluations. In addition to having an instrumental aspect, rationality of actions also includes an evaluative aspect that determines the appropriateness of ends. The comprehensive concept of rationality coordinates and integrates these two aspects in a coherent manner. Although Rescher acknowledges the importance of the gap between reality and value, he believes that this gap can be overcome via appealing to self-evident truths without necessarily adopting an instrumentalist view towards rationality. In Rescher’s view, having a relativist view towards rationality is logically impossible. By demonstrating the aims and fundamental principles of rationality, he argues that rationality is universal. At the same time, by introducing a normative hierarchy to obtain a rational solution for a specific problem in a real-life situation, he acknowledges that rational decisions do depend on situational conditions. In other words, he recognizes that rational relativism is inevitable in the lower levels of the normative hierarchy. Despite Rescher’s accuracy and deliberation in presenting ends rationality and overcoming many challenges in this regard, there are various arguments on serious components of his conception that need further reflection.

According to Rescher’s view, since all virtues are not equal and comparable, their achievement requires optimization that is making a balance between means or instruments for achieving ends in the best way so it simultaneously concerns efficiency and teleology. If rationality requires the optimization of incomparable and contradictory virtues to reach self-actualization, moral virtues should be combined with nonmoral virtues to get balanced. Therefore, the inconsistency between rationality and unconditionally general moral values and obligation to an absolute moral system becomes evident. Rescher’s definition of humanity and existential commitment to understanding oneself are among other controversial subjects Rescher should attribute people’s moral disagreements either to irrationality or oddness of some individuals and deny moral and rational disagreement among people; while it is improbable. Based on the findings of the current research, some of the elements of Rescher’s conception of rationality such as optimization, humanity, existential commitment to understanding oneself, and the relationship between reality and value are subject to serious challenges and criticisms. In this article, we will discuss these challenges and criticisms thoroughly. Ultimately, we are going to demonstrate that Rescher’s conception of rationality with its broad and novel perspective has set the stage for further philosophical and moral deliberations.

Emotional intelligence is one of the most important determinants of professional and personal success in life, while ethical decision making is a good measure to ensure judgment. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of emotional intelligence with ethical orientation with two approaches of idealism and relativism.

The research method is applied in terms of purpose, and in terms of data collection, descriptive - correlation. The statistical population consisted of among the accounting students that consisted of 385 individuals randomly selected. The data collection tool is standard questionnaire. In the present study, the collected data were analyzed using Lisrel software based on the maximum right-sided approach. In order to measure the reliability of the research tool, a combination of reliability criterion (CR), and a confirmatory factor analysis method were used for measuring convergent validity. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the hypotheses of the research.

The results show that emotional intelligence has a positive relationship with idealism but emotional intelligence does not have a significant relationship with relativism.

Students with higher emotional intelligence, idealistic in them, are more than relativism. The ability to accurately identify and control accounting students' emotions can improve their ethics.

Despite being used in different branches of humanistic science such as literature, theology, and especially philosophy during the last two to three centuries, Hermeneutics has not yet been defined clearly. The literal meaning of hermeneutics in dictionaries has been affected by its traditional meaning as an interpretation of the holy book. Although hermeneutic roots can be found in ancient Greece, its serious presence is connected closely by understanding the holy books. Levels of meanings and metaphorical aspects alongside the absent author are of the characteristics of holy books which make their understanding with a problem. That was why a means for “understanding the primary meaning of holy text “was needed and hermeneutics proposed this means. Determining the meaning was, therefore, the assumption of classical hermeneutic, and “achieving the author’s intention” was the philosophy of hermeneutical science. During the different eras, hermeneutics has been defined differently from “achieving the author’s intention” to “creating meaning by interpreter” or even “the death of the author”. From Gadamer's point of view, hermeneutics tries to understand the text. He, however, emphasizes that assumptions have great dominance on the interpreter, and, therefore, discovering the intention of the author is not possible. Such an idea strengthens relativism in the field of epistemology and is criticized by some scholars like Hersch in the school of critical hermeneutics. Eric Hersch is one of the great theoreticians believing in the intention of the author. He is known for reviving the classical hermeneutics. Although his ideas are greatly following Schleiermacher and Dilthey (romantic hermeneutic), he gets distance from the romantic hermeneutics as well as philosophical hermeneutics by referring to the fundamentals of classical hermeneutics and restricting the meaning of intention of the author. By defending from the “intention of the author”, he tried to criticize philosophical hermeneutics so his hermeneutics is known as new hermeneutic. He believes that even though discovering the intention of the author is so difficult, the chief job of an interpreter is to reveal the interpreter’s logic, interests, intellectual input, and, generally, the word of the author. One of Hersch’s ways to revive the “intention of the author” is to classify between the types of interaction with any text. he believes that four-functions are possible for every text,” understanding”, “interpretation”, “judgment”, and  “criticism”. To distinguish between these functions, he proposes two fundamental separations as “separation between “Subtilitus Explicandi” and “Subtilitas Inteligendi”. Hersch believes that the main mistake of Gadamer and Heidegger was not paying attention to this big difference in understanding. Using a method like a reverse argument, Hersch proves the incorrect consequences of denying the author and dependence of meaning of the text which is doubtfulness and ignoring determine and demands incorrectness to any kind of reasoning of a theory of independence of meaning. Separation of text from the thought of the author, hence, causes the plurality of meaning rather than a single meaning; however, it extirpates not only the author’s thought but also the essence of the meaning. Emphasizing that there is a big difference between the validity of interpretation and creativity of interpretation, Hersch points out that creativity in interpretation does not lead to the validity of interpretation. He believes validity refers to an accommodation with the meaning of the text. In this way norms like “sensitivity”, “acceptability”, “power”, and “attractiveness” are not so important. Because what the text says maybe is none of them. The aim of interpretation, therefore, from the internationalists’ perspective is the validity of interpretation which its necessity is a limitation. Hersch, hence, emphasizes that the validity of interpretation which refers to the accommodation of a meaning that text presents is not necessarily creativity in interpretation. Opposed to all internationalists who believe in the theory of independence, Hersch considers meaning a sort of awareness, not words. This departure of words from meanings makes serious problems for him which made him present some rules named as the rules of confirming interpretation in four functions. By making use of these rules, it is more probable to achieve the intention of the author and reach a valid interpretation, especially in holy books in which the author is absent. These rules are “legitimacy”, “correspondence”, “gendered appropriateness” and “coherence”.

In this paper, by reviewing the main components of Thomas Kuhn’s philosophy it will become evident that he is a critic on the distinction between the context of discovery/justification in the methodology of science. His reasoning consists of: 1. his proponents have merely dealt with the context of discovery/justification in the educational realm, according to which only the evidence regarding the justification of a hypothesis is considered effective, and the other aspects of justification are ignored. 2. the distinction of two contents is based on oversimplification in process of producing science, which merely refers to the strong point of the theories, not the weakness. 3. there exists no empirical determination in the context of justification. 4. in the process of producing science the descriptive and prescriptive aspects, of the hypotheses, are inseparable and intertwined. 5. unlike the proponents of this distinction the structured lexicon in the context of justification has no fixed and definite consequences but is subject to Kant’s relativized a priori principles facing constant change, modification, and reparation. After pronouncing these problems, Kuhn was criticized by his proponents of distinction of discovery/justification in a few contexts: 1. adopting intention on ambiguous writing style in his works, 2. applying the cyclic approach in providing an epistemic-realistic criteria list and retrieval to the non-epistemic criteria, 3. confusion between the context of decision and context of justification and concerning cause instead of reason. To escape from these criticisms, he points to the following two issues: 1. misunderstanding of his views by sympathizers of the distinction and 2. providing criteria as to preserve the objectivity of science different from the proponents of the distinction. The objective of this paper is to analyze, complete, and criticize Kuhn’s thoughts regarding the distinction of discovery/justification.

One of the main claims of Gadamer’s hermeneutic philosophy is that it is not relativistic. But it seems that this hermeneutics is afflicted by relativism in three respects. The first is the truth and reality where this hermeneutics suffers from relativism associated with reality due to Gadamer's phenomenological definition of the truth. The second and third areas are related to meaning and understanding, where his hermeneutic philosophy suffers from semantic and conceptual relativism, respectively. Gadamer has tried to use a universal basis formed through interrelating tradition and language to get rid of relativism and thereby consolidate the basis of absolutism in his own hermeneutics. But the conditions he has envisaged for language and tradition as changing phenomena and their effect on the idiosyncratic horizons of every interpreter have practically rendered null his efforts to provide a basis for the absolutization of his hermeneutics.