نشریه معرفت فرهنگی اجتماعی
پیاپی 4 (پاییز 1389)

All domains of science in humanities are based on certain epistemology, ontology, and axiology, on which there are egregious differences between western philosophy and Islamic worldview. In western philosophy, epistemology is based on dualism and individualism which lead to secularism. The realm of science in western thought, through authenticating sensational realities (sensationalism), is based on principles which are constantly changing. This change reaches its climax in Kuhn’s “paradigm” and “Boer’s proposition of “refutability”. Unlike to sensationalism and realism in western thought, Islamic thought is based on theistic epistemology in which revealed meta-traditional sources and Allah’s precedent is authentic. In Islamic worldview, the findings of observation and contemplation of creatures and nature should be tested against high levels of Guarded Tablet and Allah’s precedent, and substantiated according to them. If Devine sources approve these findings, then religious science comes into existence, if not, the science is not religious. Regarding the views of thinkers, this paper tries to investigate aforementioned parameters and compare the features of science in western thought with science in Islamic worldview.

Since some of the basic fundamentals governing modern sciences conflict with Islamic fundamentals of knowledge, the introduction of modern sciences, particularly humanities, into our country has been accompanied with different challenges from the onset. Some thinkers have introduced the development of “Religious Science” as a way to face these challenges. Therefore, the most important questions are: What is the meaning of “religious science”, and under what circumstances it would be possible?”Epistemological principles of possibility of religious science are divided into two groups: basic principles of epistemology, and basic principles of theology. There are three challenges in the case of basic principles of epistemology. First, the identity of science and knowledge is bound to using empirical method. Second, values are believed to be completely out of the realm of science and knowledge. Third, any epistemological approach of presuppositions into the realm of science is rejected. In the case of the basic principles of theology, the most important challenge is defining the knowledge-creating character of propositions existing in religious texts. If we accept that these propositions can create knowledge, then the realm of religion seriously overlaps with the realm of science. Therefore, religious science is not only possible, but also science essentially cannot be indifferent to religious propositions. So, the concept of “religious science” is not affected by any contradiction and confusion, both with respect to being “religious” and “sciences”.

Dilthey, no doubt, has a significant role in theories on human sciences. This role should be investigated in an attitude which considers human sciences independent from natural sciences. In spite of the fact that he was under the influence of different thinkers’ views, most of whom did not consider human sciences independent from natural sciences, he held that human sciences is independent, and distinct regarding its subject matter, aim, and method. Hence, he has tried to explain practically the features of human sciences in view of its subject, aim, and method. The lack of Persian resources about Dithey’s views on the subject led to the explication of his views in this paper. The main aim is to find Dithey’s intellectual foundations, particularly in his great work-“Introduction to the Human Science" which has recently been translated into Persian, and to compare these foundations with those of great Muslim philosopher, Mullā Şadrā shirazi. The comparison shows that although such thinkers as Mullā Şadrā did not focus on human sciences in its modern sense, Dithey’s views were based on a kind of criticism of Aristotelian and medieval metaphysics. This criticism, of course, does not apply to Sadraian metaphysics. According to this criticism, focusing on intellectual foundations of Sadraian thinking can be considered as a first step for followers of Mullā Şadrā to provide a different interpretation of human sciences.

The present inquiry aims at investigating the features of modern science from different aspects, including its aim, method, application, and impacts. The method of research is descriptive and analytical. This investigation, on the one hand, defines the identity of modern science and makes our understanding about it more exact. On the other hand, it exposes its essential difference and contrast with Islamic sciences. Meanwhile, it reveals some of its serious shortcomings. Radical rationalism, dominance of sense-knowledge and empirical knowledge, materialism and secularism, neglecting the end of existence, considering religious and philosophical propositions as nonsense, separation of knowledge and value, of knowledge and religion, and of knowledge and politics which serves as an instrument in the hands of politicians, omitting scientific certainty and relying solely on psychological certainty, seeking power instead of finding the truth, particularism and differentiating the sciences, are features of modern science which are investigated in this study.

Authenticity or credibility of history relies on authenticity or credibility of society, because societies are constituent cells and elements of society. Socialists and individualists have offered some intellectual proofs to prove their claims. This paper investigates Quranic arguments in this regard.Some socialists believe that in addition to individuals, communities have certain deeds and behaviors, book of deeds, reward and punishment, life and death, according to literal meaning of some Quranic verses. This indicates the fact that, in addition to individuals, communities have independent existence. In contrast, others believe that relying on literal meaning of Quranic verses is not valid, because there is no intellectual proof of philosophical authenticity of society, and no convincing intellectual proof of real existence of society has been provided. This paper recounts and summarizes the proofs of both sides.

Nowadays, some liberal thinkers talk about post-secularism, or accepting the presence of religion in a secular society. Among them is Jürgen Habermas who has proposed this idea and discussed about the circumstances of the presence of religion in modern world and its role and position. Although, he tries mostly to declare the end of the age of religion, and to replace the religion with reason, he has modified his previous views and emphasized on some of the unique functions of religion in his recent works and remarks. He has referred to the role of religion in giving meaning to the life, and accepted that religious language has an extraordinary ability and capacity in the realm of ethics, which cannot be disregarded. However, his recent remarks cannot be regarded as the emergence of a real evolution in his attitude toward religion. He continues to see the religion from a secular thinker’s point of view, and not only allocates very limited and marginal position to religion, but also tries to explain the very same moral and spiritual functions of religion in secular terms. Present paper discusses his views on these issues and evaluates their strong and weak points.

Baudrillard, who is in transitional period from Marxism, gives a clear and efficient description of consumer society as an important feature of new Capitalism. Having acquired concepts and theories about technology and consumer society, and at the onset of information age, he deals with this kind of society to analyze it in relation to previous concepts. The result of practical combination of technology, consumer society, and information age leads him to observe a new society that some have called post-modern society. Baudrillard considers Unites States as the complete model of this society, and tries to describe this newly created or ongoing situation, using his important concept, that is hyperreality, and focusing on new technologies, medias, and mass. Present paper, while looking briefly at Baudrillard’s thought development, deals with the key concept of his thought, i.e. hyperreality. Then he proceeds to investigate the image that he provides about mass media, collapse of significance, and disappearing of social fact, and finally the mass formation according to the concept of hyperreality. At the end discusses some criticism of his views.