Investigating the reasons for the impossibility of achieving secularism in Islamic societies using constructivist theory

The most fundamental question that has occupied the minds of Iranian-Islamic thinkers since the confrontation of Iranian-Islamic civilization with modern Western civilization is the possibility or impossibility of secularism and the separation of religion from politics in Islamic societies. This study examines the ideas of Abdolkarim Soroush and Javad Tabatabai who have studied and written in this field. In this regard, using the theory of constructivism, which allows us to study the transtheoretical principles and epistemological backgrounds of thinkers, we show that Soroush's loyalty to the school of Kant and his epistemologists led to the adaptation of humanities to natural sciences, which led to falsification. And jurisprudence has been denied, and then Javad Tabatabai's Hegelian background on the necessity of dialogue between Iranian-Islamic civilization and modern Western civilization is explained, which will eventually lead to the emergence of a synthesis that is the new Iranian-Islamic civilization. The logical conclusion of Soroush's theory is the transition from tradition and jurisprudence to the acceptance of secularism and modern imported concepts without resistance to it, but in contrast to Tabatabai's theory, as modernity is original, tradition is original and the main manifestation of tradition is jurisprudence and sharia A window of conversation with the modern world is offered. Finally, using the interactive nature of the theory of "constructivism" in the conclusion of the study, the reasons for the superiority of Javad Tabatabai's views in analyzing the current situation and the impossibility of secularism in the Iranian-Islamic society will come.