مجله رهیافت های سیاسی و بین المللی
سال یازدهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 60، زمستان 1398)

The history of political thought has always been influenced by a certain view of the relation between theory and political action. According to this view, the idea of action takes precedence and thus every political action needs to adhere to a political theory. However, this classical philosophical presumption has been challenged by the later philosophers such as Wittgenstein and Oakeshott. In this regard, the fundamental question can be asked: »What is the relation between Wittgenstein and Oakeshott and what are its political implications? The research hypothesis is that: “Wittgenstein and Oakeshott, contrary to the common practice, prefer to overthrow the traditional view and overthrow the traditional view of action. And consequently, politics departs from the realm of pure abstraction and comes closer to the daily life and experience of human life, and thus our understanding of political theory and its relation to political action undergoes fundamental changes. “The method of research is the comparative approach and theoretical framework, Wittgenstein›s anthropological theory and Michael Oakeshott theatrical man.

We already know that political though has been evolved on two different grounds in Iran and the West. In Iran, political thought has evolved out of a religious worldview and in the west, it has evolved out a philosophical worldview. Many different aspects between an Iranian and Iranian-Islamic political thought and the western equivalent arise from this background evolutional culture. The main aim of this research is that the relationship between these two worldviews will be analyzed with considering their essential differences that make them two separate worldviews as we know them: Iranian and western. The research hypothesis being tested here is that Iranian and Greek worldviews were conceived differently from their initial stages of evolution and thus they took different paths to develop a political thought: the first stepping into the religious worldview and the second concerning itself with philosophical worldview. Research Method is Content analysis. The Result is that Out of these two paths, Philosophical Worldview has created a greater potential for evolution and a bigger possibility for developing a political thought.

Exploring the political thought of Dr. Shariati has the history of at least 40 years. The result of this exploring is the expression of various and sometimes contradictory ideas and opinions about this Iranian thinker. Shariati›s effort to show the relationship between tradition and modernity achieves a new pattern and establishes an ideal society on the basis of that pattern which is one of the issues that formed the basis of Shariati›s thought. The main question of the research is: What is the most important reason for Shariati to create a dialogue between tradition and modernity, and what did this endeavor mean? Apparently, Shariati was seeking to bring about a convergence and conversation between tradition and modernity because of the alienation of the Third World people. The paper intends to analyze accuracy and indisposition of this hypothesis by describing and analyzing Shariati’s thoughts using the historical - sociological method and based on the theory of crisis in Spragens. Research studies show that Shariati has been seeking to reconcile tradition and modernity by providing discourses of Islamic Protestantism and a return to self, although he has not succeeded in achieving this goal.

Although, first of all, in an era called Democracy, speaking of populism and increasing the popularity of populist leaders, parties, and agendas seems irrational and unconventional, but in practice, in the last few decades, there has been a rise of various forms of this political trend, as well as readings, narratives and analyzes of this phenomenon around the world. The study is mainly an attempt in the theoretical field )looking at the objective examples of populism( to answer the following two questions: First, what are the characteristics and nature of populism and how it works? And secondly, what are the reasons for the victory of populist parties and leaders around the world and the general popularity of people over the past two decades? Research findings show that this phenomenon, along with other factors, is mainly due to the crisis of democracy, especially the weakening of the policy of representation, the crisis of intermediary structures, and the non-responsiveness of the ruling oligarchic elites. The situation in which the media policy and the emergence of populist leaders have paved the way for the process of reaching it. The method of research is a causal explanation and data collection method is library-based and also Internet resources have been used.

In the modern era of intellectual and technological change, the direction of economic affairs has also changed and the simultaneous role of government and society in economic development is emphasized. Thus, international institutions have put forward a good governance model whose structure, indicators, and institutional and social determinants of this model influence economic development. In the years 2017-2016, Akp Party in turky coincides with the Ahmadinejad and Rouhani presidency in Iran. According to statistics from international institutions, economic indicators in the two countries differ. Against this background, it seems that the issue of governance in the two countries is influential on this issue. Therefore, the main question of this paper is what is the role of good governance model in economic development of Iran and Turkey in the period under review? The findings of this study show that the status of good governance indices improves or collapses the economic indices in both countries as well as relative to each other in a given period. Therefore, this paper deals with the role of good governance in the process of economic development of Iran and Turkey with an analytical-descriptive and comparative approach and statistics of international authorities.

Post-metaphysical thinking as a critique of the metaphysical tradition of Western philosophy spread in the second half of the twentieth century, and some have regarded it as a sign of a break from ancient Greek tradition. This article examines the post-metaphysical possibilities of the Greek philosophical tradition by browsing of intellectual debates between poets and philosophers, Milesian School and Eleatic school, the Sophists and Socrates, and finally Plato and Aristotle, and concludes that not only the whole Greek tradition may not be considered metaphysical, but also there are some components of post-metaphysical thinking such as situated reason, the priority of action to theory, and attention to the metaphorical aspect of language in the minds of epic and tragic Greek poets, Sophists and Aristotle. Thus, a contextual interpretation of the texts shows that, besides the metaphysical objective reason in Greece, there are also traces of subjective and rhetorical reason in the minds of some Greek thinkers and so the tension between metaphysics and post-metaphysics that peaked in the twentieth century has also been present in the founding of philosophy and in the system of Greek philosophical knowledge. This is particularly testable in Aristotle's critique on two theories of Ideas and philosopher king of Plato by applying the thoughts of epopees, tragedians, and sophists.

This article has used the concept of explanation specified in Fairclough’s discourse analysis method to explain the mutual relationship between the New Middle Class and the Moderate Third Current in post Islamic revolutionary in Iran. For this purpose, first, we will draw up overall picture of the six elements of that current and then will analyze the relationship of these elements with the new middle class. So the normative )reproduction( or creative )trying to change( relation between these two variables will be the main question. Investigations show that the relationship between these elements and that class have been both normative and creative. That means the moderate third current can be considered as a part of the class struggle of the new middle class and also this current has not been able to represent all the wishes of that class and followed to change it. The new middle class has also been influential on the emergence and changes in the discourse of this current and it has been able to bring the discourse closer to its own ideals.