secularism

This paper is about the condemnation of 1277 that was issued by the bishop of Paris (Etienne Tempier) against the Aristotelian, Thomistic and Averroist theological teachings. This condemnation was initially aimed at protecting the doctrine of God's absolute power and critique of the philosophical and theological reasoning about God, but later it led to new developments that were outside of the initial goals of its founders and were in conflict with it. This research, using an analytical approach, tries to provide an analysis of the backgrounds and philosophical and theological disagreements that led to the condemnation of 1277, and to present a map of its conceptual scope. Then, we have discussed some of the epistemological and theological implications of this condemnation, among which the doctrine of God's absolute power is the most prominent and one of the main goals of this condemnation. But we have also raised and analyzed the long-term implications such as nominalism, secularism, and the development of modern science and its departure from the Platonic perspective, and it has shown that these are hidden implications that were not only unintended by the founders of the condemnation but also in conflict with their main lines of thought.

Spirituality and meaningfulness of life is an issue that has pitted two traditional religious thoughts and the modern secular world against each other. The basic question is, "Is spirituality achieved only through religion, or is it possible to live a meaningful life in a secular society?" Religious spirituality relies on the immaterial world and spiritual affairs and can include moral values, religion, sacred or occult matters, mysticism, etc. or any kind of spiritual and spiritual state in life. Secular meaningfulness is focused on the point that meaningful life is the result of rationality, which is achieved as a result of free, conscious, voluntary and purposeful human action, and its fruit should be the improvement of human's worldly life conditions. With this understanding, it becomes clear that there is a fundamental difference between the two categories of religiosity and spirituality, as if spirituality can be separated from religiosity. The difference between religiosity and spirituality is that if religiosity is not out of servitude, it is not religiosity; But if spirituality comes from servitude, it is not spirituality. What secularism claims to try to realize is purifying human thoughts from superstitions and deviations.

Deism appeared at a crucial time in the formation of the new West and developed a particular view of God, the world, and religion. Therefore, understanding deism and its consequences can enrich our understanding of modernity and reveal the way to avoid possible mistakes and deviations. since this movement was not treated equally in Europe and the United States, in order to limit the scope of the discussion, only French deism will be examined, which is the center of revolutionary changes appeared in eighteenth-century Europe.
We try to show the impact of this intellectual movement on the culture and thought of the eighteenth century Enlightenment, as well as explaining the anti-Trinitarian origin of French deism. The role and influence of French deism on the rejection of revealed religion and the establishment of the authority of modern science are among the most important influences of this movement on the French Enlightenment culture. Hence, the founders of this movement can be identified by characteristics such as scientism, promotion of secular ethics, and reduction of lordship to creativity.

In Islam, establishing a government by Prophet and Imams is awarded a special status. During the occultation of the Imam, the most important reason for founding a government is to maintain the sovereignty of religion and divine prophets. Among Imamiyya thinkers, Shaykh Tusi brought up the theory of separation of Imamate and Prophecy. He does not regard executive domain and sovereignty to be a part of the prophet’s responsibilities. He also believes in the separation of Imamate from Prophecy. Such a viewpoint may be considered as the equivalent of Secularism. The current article attempts to clarify this issue and by drawing on the evidence in Shaykh’s works, it refutes the attribution of Secularism to his theory. However, regarding the question of Imamate, in some instances he has inadvertently expressed his belief in the theory.

The relationship between science and its foundations and its influence on thought and worldview and how science is influenced by its foundations are important issues in the philosophy of science. In recent decades, due to serious discussions in the philosophy of science and the emphasis of some philosophers of science on the direction of science and value changes in religious societies, this question (the relationship between science and worldview) has been raised more seriously and religious science versus Secular science emerged and the role of secularism in the production of modern natural science became more apparent. Secularism, which is a kind of exclusivism in the field of existence and cognition, by entering each of the scientific fields, brings a different definition of the subject, method and purpose for that science. Undoubtedly, this school defines the principles and presuppositions of science based on its worldview. This article uses analytical-descriptive method to explain and study the role of the principles and presuppositions of secularism in the evolution of modern science and to try to express and show its secularist nature in its subject, method, nature and consequently its secular consequences. That science is not just a matter of experience, but that the thoughts of scientists influence the direction of science.

One of the main foundations of modern thought is the concept of freedom. Although there is no common approach among modern thinkers in this regard, they all agree on the influence of classical liberalism, especially in the view of John Stuart Mill. Mill is one of the founding thinkers of modern liberalism, which, on the basis of utilitarianism, believes in the absolute freedom of the individual. His thought relies on the foundations of the modern age, such as subjectivism, pluralism, secularism, and humanism. These principles, with the theological approach of the modern age, lead to consequences such as anti-traditionalism, humanism, and so on. According to the principles of Islam, the idea of ​​Mill and his intellectual foundations face serious challenges. He aims at freedom itself, which is a kind of view against the laws of life and degrades human transcendent morality and causes a kind of corruption and emptiness in society and the individual. In this research, with the descriptive-analytical method, first we propose the idea of ​​Mill and then with the critical analytical method we critique his theory based on the intellectual system of Professor Mohammad Taqi Jafari.

AbstractThe discussion of rationality is one of the most complex and important issues of epistemology. According to the analytical-logical study in the field of religion and secularism and the difference between rationality in these two areas which is the purpose of this article, we will conclude that rationality in secularism is a tool rationality which is practiced in nature, spirituality and intellectual rationality. It reflects in everyday life a purely pragmatic and arbitrary view, and secularism has shaped and politicized its social world with instrumental rationality and influence in all aspects of Western social life. But in religious thought, rationality with a healthy nature requires spirituality, a controller, a moderator, and a modifier of political power; and with emphasis on religious scientific principles and rules for rationalizing certain principles such as reason, faith, sanctity, wisdom, hypocrisy, The purification of morality from the law is needed.

Secularism is a kind of exclusivism in the sphere of knowing the existence. It brought a new definition for the subject matter, the method and the goal of any scientific sphere wherein it entered. It defines the foundations and presuppositions of sciences according to its own worldview. This article seeks to prove that if the definition of the man and his values has approached the definition and the nature of the material and mechanical world in the recent centuries, it is just because of the effect of natural sciences on humanities and redefinition of the basic parameters of those sciences (such as viewing the man, the universe and God) following the definition of those parameters in natural sciences. Accordingly, we will discuss reductionism, mechanical view, quantitative view, observability, naturalism, atomism, rejecting the ultimate causes and non-totalist view of the universe as the secularist bases of science. And finally, we will criticize the one-dimensional attitude governing those sciences. The discussion method is analytical and the result of the study emphasizes the necessity of revising many of the foundations of the modern natural sciences.

One of the original teachings of modernity is the subject of secularism. According to this doctrine; The constitution, the rule of law, and the customary law of modern Western countries are based on the non-authority of religion, the privatization of religious rites, the separation of politics, and the conflict of science and reason with religion. In recent years, prominent political science thinkers such as Jurgen Habermas have reconstructed the position of religion in society and the relationship between politics and religion by proposing post-secularism and arguing for the necessity and presence of religion in the public sphere. In this article, the post-secular teachings of Habermas and the metasecular views of Motahhari are examined and compared in a descriptive-analytical method. According to the findings of this study, Habermas and Motahhari's ideas are similar to the incompleteness of secularism and the necessity of religion's presence in politics, and differ in the sources of transition from secularism and the scope of religion's presence in post-secular society. Based on the humanistic teachings of modernity,

Today, in the Arab world a current of modern thought has intended to limit religion to spirituality. This current has softly passed the religious tradition and law, and has preferred the religion without socio-political precepts to the religion of them. Mohammad Saeed al-Ashmawi (1932-2013) is one representative of this approach. He has presented a secular interpretation of religion in the Islamic world by adopting a historical approach to the Qur'an, humanizing the Qur'anic rhetoric, and limiting the validity of prophetic traditions and jurisprudential laws to the time of the Prophet. This paper, in an analytical and document-base method, seeks to evaluate and critique his premises of this secular approach. The findings of the study show that there are intrinsic inconsistencies in his thought including defeating the purpose of the Wise God, denial of the immortality of religion, human completely being needless to religion, denial of the daf`i revelation of the Qur'an , and the denial of the Prophet's infallibility. These issues have challenged al-Ashmawi's approach to religious studies.

The followers of the divine command theory regard ethics as completely dependent on religion and do not regard a meaning and reality for it beyond the divine command and countermand. On the other hand, the followers of secular ethics view ethics as prior and superior to religion, and at least consider moral values as an independent meaning and reality. In the meantime, some theorists of Islamic thought, despite the rejection of the theory of the divine command, believe in religious ethics and deem religion consisting of ethics. The chosen theory is that ethics is the same as religion and religion is the same as ethics, and despite the inaccuracy of divine command theory, there is a reading of religious ethics that is superior to secular ethics in all semantic, ontological, epistemological, and psychological aspects.

The purpose of this article is to investigate the necessity of religion from a sociological perspective in the two periods of modernism and postmodernism. A librarian method is used to answer this question, which is partly based on the results of "social concrete experience". The views of some outstanding anti-religious scholars of the period of modernism is first presented; then the views of the important scholars of the period of post-modernism and the international organizations are explained. Although the idea of secularism has been dominant on the world for more than hundred years and it has been developed but, as this research shows, secularism is declined at the beginning of the period of post-modernism and desecularism has appeared and developed. The cognitive outcome of this research is to strengthen the historical-universal view regarding major religious changes; in addition, as a national outcome of this research, it improves the views of those Westernized fellow citizens – who still think on the basis of modern theories and analysis and thus believe the Islamic republic of Iran and its resultant system moves in the opposite direction of contemporary and future world and human changes – concerning how much does the contemporary world tend to religion. Unlike this incorrect recognition, the Islamic Republic of Iran can be the central point and leader of the post-modern religious conceptual changes.

Although the historical and geographical origin of modernism is related to the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in Europe, but there is no doubt that it has increasingly affected the farthest places in the world till today and still moves forward to equalize the cultures of different nations. One of the most important characteristics of modernism from the beginning to the end of 1960 decade is opposition with religion, tradition and the past but from then onward, we gradually see the increasing tendency to religion and tradition in the world; such that some have named the new period as post-modernity. Antony Giddens believes the essential elements of modernism are still present and strengthened in the new period because the essence of modernism is pluralism not opposition with tradition.
This writing will compare the prior and later approaches of modernism after mentioning its epistemological, ontological and sociological characteristics and will analyze the factors which have changed this orientation such as inability of science to answer some fundamental questions of human and the meaning of life, epistemological doubt in the bases of science, formation of social and mental crisis and even changes in the basis of classic religions and formation of newborn religious movements and… and will show that changes in the bases of new technology and science and some main changes in the principles of religious and traditional thought is the way to rescue from destructive crisis of mankind.

The question of the origin of moral values has always been among the most important and challenging questions for moral philosophers dividing moral schools into realist and non-realist. Positive secularism is a branch of non-realist school of thought. It includes all schools that regard common parlance as the origin of moral values. John Rawl's theory of social justice is an important theory in moral philosophy. It is not clear whether or not it is secular in nature. Some consider it as realist negating that it is secular whereas others term it as non-realist and secular. Using a descriptive – analytic methodology, this study alludes to some of the secular implications of Rawl's theory. It critically assesses this theory if it happens to be a secular one.

Religion and politics and the relationship between them are among the important problems in Mulla Sadra’s philosophy. In fact, the issue of politics, which is one of the noteworthy realms of human life, never escaped his attention. Mulla Sadra always emphasized Man’s social nature in his works and did not consider individual life to be enough even if it were intertwined with religion. In his view, the development of Man is possible only through living a social life. He also maintained that a society which is geared to provide the context for the growth and development of its members should be governed based on Islamic laws. Politics is different from religion in terms of origin, end, act, and passivity; however, it is completely melted in religion, which is the innermost and truth of politics. Mulla Sadra considered the relationship between religion and politics to be the same as the one between the intelligible and the sensible or between the inward and outward aspects. He argues that as the knowledge of physics is incomplete without the knowledge of metaphysics, using politics without resorting to religion will result in Man’s plunge into forms and ignorance of transcendent truths. This will cause some irreparable damages to human life. A correct clarification of Mulla Sadra’s philosophy is the best barrier against secularism, which emphasizes the separation of religion from politics.

During middle ages when the West was sunken in darkness and superstitions, Islamic world was at its highest point of flourishing. From the thirteenth century onwards, however, science was exposed to decline among Muslims. In sixteenth century when the west was in scientific progress, the East was eager to be equipped with sciences; the West used the eagerness of the East and, regardless of the culture of eastern traditional society transferred its scientific findings to it. Not so late, the eastern found that science may not be neutral and even it has been of negative effects on the western society such as alienation. Again, the westerns` culture was different from the easterns`. Such a new attention to the cultural consequences of western sciences led to different positions among Muslim scholars. Some knew modern science as something opposing to Islam, some agreed with modern science, some other sought to make Islam as modern science demands and some tried to put modern science in the depth of Islamic view of the world. This paper is a research on functionalism and symbolism taken respectively by seyyed Hosein Nasr and Ziaoddin Sardar.

This short piece of writing intends to elucidate the ideological convergence of deferrers (morjeah) and secularism.
The method of the research is descriptive-analysis and library resources.
Morjeah which was first founded following a completely political perspective, later on turned to constructing verbal principles. In the interpretation of Belief this sect claimed that Belief is something vast and that no cardinal sin puts man out of the belief Domain Zone and hence judging about peoples¡s Belief should be postponed until the judgment day. In comparison, secularism is also a political and thought school which emerged strongly and seriously in the17th century (A.D.) This school of thought emphasized worldliness and originality and highlights the belief that Religion should be distinct and separated from society and politics domains leading to the demise of religion and putting religion aside from social and political life of human beings.
The authores of the research conclude the two thoughts of Erja and secular have some commonalities regarding roots¡ and consequences which deserve contemplation and scrutiny. Both emphasize on putting aside the religion and religious concepts from political domains and issues.

The rationality of the epistemic and value system is based on epistemology, cosmology, anthropology and axiology. Since widely differing views are presented are on each of these factors, we must admit that we will have different types of rationality. Religious types of rationality are clearly differentiated from secular ones. Of course, we may find various types of rationality in these two spectra. It is clear that Islamic rationality is not the same as the Christian and Jewish types of rationality and it is wrong to assume that modern secular rationality is the same as ancient Greek or Roman secular rationality. However, each of these kinds of rationality has its own specific requirements and outputs. As a special way of managing communities, democracy may be approved by some types of rationality and rejected by other types. Considering democracy from the view of Islamic rationality, the present paper seeks to estimate the relationship between the two. Addressing this issue is important because many experts believe that democracy is the outcome of secularism and it develops only in the atmosphere when secularism prevails. This paper attempts to refute this claim and prove that the reverse of it is true.