پژوهش نامه انتقادی متون و برنامه های علوم انسانی
پیاپی 95 (مهر 1400)

By the new foundation of philosophy and science, the concept of method gains the main status among many scholars of the new ages. The “forerunners” of philosophy and science sought the way out of the skepticism, that emerged from the endless controversies concerning the universals and the possibility of rational and philosophical knowledge about nature during the High- and Late scholasticism, in the concept of “method”. As one of these founders, Francis Bacon has tried to define and describe his conception of the method. He makes use of the metaphors of ship, labyrinth, thread, and trial-court to put light on his account of scientific research. These metaphors, enable us to reconstruct the various features of his account of method and his expectations of applying method in the realm of natural sciences.

Manzello’s encounter with the nature of historical cognition and the quality of its achievement on the two epistemological horizons of modernism and postmodernism in the light of the three historical approaches of reconstructionism, constructivism and deconstructionism in the transition from modernism to postmodernism, with the subtle difference between the two concepts of "historian" And the “history-researcher” is considered to be examined. The historian who lives in the discourse space of the realization of the historical subject, immersed in modern conditions, experiences and compels the resulting comprehension of history and creates historical documents. The “history-researcher” lives in the contemporary discourse space and thinks in accordance with the structural and discourse requirements of his time and communicates with history. The history-researcher, both in the sense of reconstruction-construction and in the sense of deconstruction, presents his narrative in the light of narration and passing through events. A detailed description of the above-mentioned three approaches is considered by Manzello's book entitled “Deconstruction of History”, which is examined in both negative and positive aspects.

Confrontation of Islamic and Modern culture and civilization is the most important issue of the day.  Knowledge and sciences are the main obstacles in the design and analysis of each culture.  Therefore, confrontation of the Islamic and modern knowledge and sciences is one of the essential issues in academic centers, especially in Iran which is considered as the leading society in the renovation of the Islamic new civilization. Different writers are concerned about this subject.  One of them is Khaki, the writer of Tahlile Howiate Elme Dini and Elme Modern (Analysis of the Identity of Religious and Modern Science.).  Regarding the importance and controversies of ideas in this issue, this article aims to criticize this book’s features and contents.  In analyzing the content of the book, we are looking for its logical and systematic harmony in the principles and the results presented by the writer. Summary of different sections of the book is presented, followed by their critics. The writer criticizes modern sciences regarding three historical phases of the scientific revolution, positivism, and post-positivism, epistemologically and puts forward his proofs in favor of value-oriented characteristics of modern science. He points to the criteria of its value-oriented characteristic as well. The writer believes that there is no change without direction. So, all scientific issues are goal-oriented regarding the macro interpretation of individual and society’s definition and destiny.  Regarding this issue, modern sciences are not useful as software for producing Islamic civilization even when they act as an obstacle in this issue. The book is a good summary and presentation of materials of Farhangestane Olome Islami which are available in their publications in different levels.

Amongst longstanding, and sometimes vexing debates around the scientific method, the explication, and analysis of the concept of method received scant attention. In this paper, I have tried to suggest a clear account of the method. My proposed account is closely tied to the concepts of “descriptive ought/ought not” and “cognitive purposes”. In consequence, I have pinned down these two concepts. In the next section, I have indicated how logic is related to the scientific method. According to my suggestion, the logic differs from the scientific method in that the former fulfills a more general and comprehensive cognitive purpose than the latter. Logic is a precondition for gaining any sort of knowledge, that is, knowledge as such. On the contrary, the scientific method is required to obtain proper knowledge in a specific domain. Then, I have considered the sorts of relation there might be between ethics and the scientific method. In the last section, I have got into considering what my suggestions yield to when applied to social science.

Nick Trakakis, the contemporary philosopher of religion, in his book “The End of the Philosophy of Religion”, presents his idea on the relationship between metaphilosophy and methodology of the contemporary philosophy of religion in both analytical and continental traditions. Before entering into the controversial debates and issues of the philosophy of religion, he tries to understand the methods and goals pursued in the philosophical traditions, as well as to analyze and critique the strengths and weaknesses of these traditions. To achieve the above goal, Trakakis deals with the design and formulation of the distinction and similarity of philosophical styles in the two analytical and continental traditions. Trakakis examines the examples of thinkers from these two traditions and concludes that the religious philosophy in the analytical tradition seeks to assume a particular point of view in metaphilosophy and philosophical methodology, within the narrow confines on scientifically rationalized and logical arguments - independent of the concrete and existential concerns of human life. While introducing analytical key themes in his book “The End of the Philosophy of Religion”, this paper critique the Trakakis 's views from a methodological point of view and its relationship to metaphilosoph.

The book “After Method; Mess in Social Science Research” written by English philosopher and sociologist John Law, is one of the few books which explores the method itself philosophically-sociologically. “After Method” explores and challenges the metaphysical assumptions and normativities of conventional methods and tries to provide an alternative approach toward method. The book also rethinks practices, purposes, and expression techniques of conventional methods through a variety of case studies. This book advances the discussion in the space of constructivism and actor-network theory; however, in the author's opinion, it goes beyond these two in several places, particularly in the discussions related to indefiniteness and multiplicity. In this article, we will lay out the most important claims and positions of this book and discuss also some of its shortcomings

The nature of modern western technology and the relation between non-western societies and this new foreign phenomenon are two important matters which alongside the increase of the intercourse of these societies and this phenomenon, have preoccupied many of their indigenous intellectuals. The book “The Choice of Technology from the Monotheistic Perspective” is the outcome of the reflection of one of these intellectuals that lives in a non-western country. In this book, Asghar Taherzadeh as an Iranian Muslim intellectual explained his opinions about the nature of modern western technology and the proper relation between the Iranian Shiite society and western technology based on Islamic teachings. He has made extensive use of these teachings, especially “Quran” to express his views. The purpose of this article is to introduce and critique Taherzadeh's book. For this purpose, we will compare his views in this book with some of the views expressed in the literature of Philosophy of Technology; we will also express some of his special theses.

Saul Kripke’s Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language offers an unorthodox interpretation of Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations. Contrary to other commentators, Kripke regards rule-following as the main issue of the book so that it gives Wittgenstein’s most significant argument for the impossibility of private language. Kripke formulates Wittgenstein’s argument in response to a skeptic who seeks a fact in exchange for the words’ meaning or correct rule-followings. Kripke’s Wittgenstein dismisses such a claim, arguing that the use of a word or following a rule is called “correct” when it agrees with other users of the language or rule. There is no corresponding fact for meaning or rule-following, nor is there any other criterion that can assess one’s responses. Kripke’s interpretation of Wittgenstein’s question and answer has provoked many philosophical debates, which have important implications for the methodology of the social sciences as well as the humanities. After an account of Kripke’s skeptical challenge and his answer to it, this paper reviews some rival interpretations and their criticisms of Kripke’s exegesis. This provides the opportunity to point out the impact of this debate on other intellectual issues. Finally, one of the Persian translations of this book will be examined.

This article is a review of the “Routledge Handbook of Planning Research Methods”. The review attempts to summarize the content of the book and to show how understanding the methodology affects the work of academics and professionals. Among other methodology books, The Routledge Handbook is a genuine reference and the reasons can be summarized as follows: Unlike other dominant sources, this book has specifically explored the relations in the field of planning and stays within the discipline. It has also attempted to promote methodology from rigid and homogeneous entities to academics to the dynamic practices in the personal, social, and professional lives of researchers. Numerous articles in the book are mostly concerned with the link between theory and practice, and to establish this link they underpin the research production process. In the end, a brief evaluation of the content of the book is made and the necessity of incorporating it into the formal planning pedagogy is stated.

In the 1990s, the Iranian intellectual community faced a trend of religious modernization. This new spirit flowed in the academic and seminary community, and the market for scientific debate and critique flourished. From this point of view, the age of righteousness has replaced the age of duty, and as a result, they demanded a new interpretation of religious texts and task-oriented jurisprudence. The common denominator of this movement is that pure understanding is not possible, and any understanding is preceded by pre-understandings. For this reason, this movement has been inspired by hermeneutic theories that seek to understand the nature and mechanism of understanding. The book under review examines the influence of Heidegger and Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics on the religious modernization movement. In this article, I describe, analyze and evaluate the main claims of the book. It seems that Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics is not a good model for analyzing the current of religious modernism, and although they have similarities, it is in some ways in conflict with the foundations of this movement.

The four courses of “Epistemology”, “Introduction to Islamic Philosophy”, “Psychology from the perspective of Muslim thinkers”, and "Philosophy of Science in Psychology" in the undergraduate program of psychology are dedicated to philosophical topics. By selecting the appropriate topics for students and observing the correct order, the efficiency of these topics should be increased. In this paper, after reviewing the status and reasons for learning philosophical topics in the psychology curriculum, the approved topics of these four review courses and the suggested topics and sources are presented. In this study, several points have been seriously considered: (1) the audience is a student of psychology, not a student of philosophy, (2) in each course, there are several main approaches, which should be selected as an appropriate approach to psychology students, (3) other courses related to these topics should be considered in the psychology curriculum, (4) the order of presentation of the courses needs to be reviewed, (5) the topics should be selected according to the number of hours, and (6) despite the publication of new works, There is still work to be done to compile and publish appropriate textbooks for psychology students.

“Methodology of Islamic Humanities” from Ahmad Hossein Sharifi who is a faculty member of Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute, is the second book in his trilogy on Islamic humanities (Foundation of Islamic humanities and Islamic theorizing in humanities). In this book, in the first three chapters (analysis of concepts and introductory points, counter-method theory, and research questions), he describes the generalities of his view, and in the fourth to fourteenth chapters, seven methods of Islamic humanities, ie definition, description, explanation (and characteristics of explanatory methodology), reasoning (deductive, inductive and allegorical), interpretation (and methodological features of interpretation), prediction and evaluation. In this article, after the introduction and formal critique of the book, first the general critiques and then the critiques regarding the chapters of the book in terms of content are presented. Although in a general evaluation, this book, has not been able to expand and explain the Islamic principles in the methodological details of the Islamic humanities.

This article reviews the book “The Relationship between Religion and Technology”. The main effort of the book, as the author himself states, is to study the interaction of technology and religion in the context of the Islamic worldview, as well as to present a theory for achieving Islamic technology. The present article first examines the main concern of the book and its place among other publications of the author. Then the research methodology of the book author will be assessed. Finally, a detailed evaluation of the author's project on Islamic technology will be presented. The claim of this article is that the book does not succeed in achieving a coherent theory about Islamic technology, and this effort needs to be modified and completed. In fact, the author's view focuses on the intentions of the designers and users of technological artifacts, not on the structure and physical properties of the artifacts, and thus the concept of "religious technology" is reduced to what the author calls "non-religious technology" (as opposed to anti-religious).

Sociological theories are diverse and this science needs rethinking and critique. If so, far sociological critiques have not had a clear framework. Therefore, a specific method and framework are needed to critique sociological theories. The purpose of this article is to provide a suitable framework for criticizing theories. For this purpose, an attempt has been made to use a metatheoretical approach. The research method is documentary and review. Research findings show that the critique of sociological theories is necessary for theoretical progress in this field. But the critique process has significant challenges and metatheorizing is a good framework for overcoming these challenges. Metatheorizing allows for the rethinking and critique of theories and their deep understanding. Metatheorizing also creates a new theoretical perspective. In this research, six main steps for criticizing sociological theories are mentioned. These steps include identifying a theoretical problem or question, extracting the propositions and fundamental theorems of the theory, identifying and analyzing the assumptions of the theory, analyzing the compatibility of the theory, examining the connection of theory with other theories, examining the empirical validity of the theory, comparing theory with other theories, extracting similarities and differences, and theoretical links.

As the founder of phenomenology, Husserl himself did not use phenomenology to analyze art and works of art. Except for a few hints in Encyclopedia Britannica's article, he did not write anything in this area. However, he paved the way for the phenomenology of art and led many post-Husserlian phenomenologists to look at art from a phenomenological perspective. This article aims to show the application of the phenomenological method in aesthetics and analysis of works of art. To achieve this, we will first refer briefly to the ideas of M.Dufrenne (who is somewhat faithful to Husserl's intellectual tradition) to reveal to him how the phenomenology of aesthetic experience. Then according to Heidegger's views (which are further from Husserl's tradition), we will examine in the phenomenological analysis of art to see how Hermeneutic phenomenology can re-establish the neglected relationship between truth and art.

In recent years, the topics of philosophy of humanities, philosophy of technology and the role of humanities and technology in the process of development have been widely welcomed. A philosophical discussion about the relation of science and technology, especially the relation of humanities, programs, and institutions as soft technologies, can assist in science and technology policymaking in human and social life. The book "Humanities as Technology" answers the fundamental question: “Can humanities be understood as technology and can this understanding be used in the policymaking of humanities and soft technologies?” The authors of this book elaborate on this discussion by conducting case studies in the field of information technology and jurisprudence, using the approach of critical rationality. In this article, after introducing the book, critical points are raised in relation to some of the main claims of the book; in particular, the view that jurisprudence should be understood as mere technology. In the end, suggestions for modifying and completing this book and turning it into a textbook are presented.

The purpose of this article is to critically evaluate the book “Critical Review of the Book Contemporary Research Methods in the Humanities (Discussions on Politics of Method)", by Ahmad Mohammadpour. The context for the formation of the most important theoretical and practical streams in the humanities and their ontological and epistemological aspects has been presented in this book. From this point of view, the book can be considered as a valuable document in this field. The main message of this book is that it is research methods derived from our worldviews and lifeworld that shape our understanding and interpretation of the world, and thus the author introduces a new concept called" Politics of Method ". The results of the review of this book show that the author has not been able to convey well the key and operational points about “Politics of Method " and his new findings; Therefore, this book is not able to provide guidelines for researchers in designing a research program from the perspective of methodology. Lack of connection between chapters, different language in presenting views and topics, inadequate translation of many parts of the book, are also among the weaknesses of this book.