تأملی در «مبنای حقوق» ذیل رویکردهای مختلف به معرفت دینی (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
در هر نظام حقوقی، منشأ و محتوای هنجارها را باید در مبنا و مبانی آن جستجو کرد، امّا دور از نظر نیست که در جوامع دارای باورها و گرایشات محکم دینی، مبنای حقوق بیش از آن که متأثر از مباحث مرسوم مکاتب حقوقی باشد، ذیل رویکردهای متفاوت به معرفت دینی و نسبت فیمابین آن ها تشخص می یابد. در این پژوهش، پس از تبیین دو افق کلان در معرفت دینی، سه رویکرد اصلی مبنای حقوق در نظام حقوقی ایران شناسایی و مورد مطالعه واقع شده است؛ شاخص ترین ویژگی رویکرد نخست انکار نقش دین به عنوان مبنای حقوق است. در این رویکرد، مؤلفه های جامعه مدرن با شاخصه های تعیین کننده قواعد حقوقی مستخرج از دین متباین دانسته شده و به تبع آن قواعد حقوقی یکسره محصول عقل و عرف بشری دانسته شده است. در رویکرد دوم، تبیینی از دین ارائه شده که مؤلفه های اساسی حقوق در غرب یعنی آزادی، برابری و امثال آن ها از منظر دین قابل پذیرش باشد. این رویکرد در عمل با رویکرد نخست تفاوت اساسی ندارد ولی از حیث نظری با تحمیل قرائتی خاص از دین، تلاش می کند حقوق مدرن را از دل مبانی دینی استخراج کرده و رویکرد متمایزی به عنوان مبنای حقوق به نمایش گذارد. در رویکرد سوم امّا، ضمن ورود اشکال به مبانی دو رویکرد نخستین و تأکید بر نقش اصیل دین به عنوان مبنای حقوق، در مواجهه با چالش های عملی و اجرایی نظام حقوقی مبتنی بر دین راهکارهای متفاوت و برآمده از مبانی دینی ارائه شده است.A Reflection on the "Foundation of Law" in Light of Various Approaches to Religious Epistemology
Introduction The study delves into the fundamental aspect of legal systems—the foundation of law—and its crucial role in shaping legal norms. Grounded in the unique sociocultural context of contemporary Iran, the research embarks on a comprehensive analysis of the interplay between legal perspectives and religious knowledge. While conventional discussions on the foundation of law often revolve around legal theories, this study, informed by the prominence of religion and its influence on Iranian society, investigates the role of "religious epistemology" as the guiding force behind legal doctrines. Research Question The pivotal inquiry centers on the degree of autonomy governments possess in promulgating laws and whether there exist predetermined guidelines and criteria governing the enactment of laws. In essence, the research explores the foundational basis upon which legal systems are established and the factors influencing the imposition of legal norms by the state. This prompts a critical examination of the autonomy of governments in lawmaking and the need for compliance with predetermined standards to confer credibility and legitimacy upon enacted laws. Research Hypothesis Two distinct perspectives emerge in response to the aforementioned question: On one hand, proponents of the natural law school argue that laws must align with natural, rational, and just principles, with human beings serving as discoverers or interpreters of these inherent laws. Legitimacy and obligation, according to this view, are rooted in the congruence of laws with reality and justice, regardless of governmental recognition. On the other hand, adherents of the positivist perspective contend that legal rules are mere products of human will and governmental imposition. In this paradigm, the legitimacy and obligation of laws are solely contingent upon governmental endorsement, rendering the alignment with reality or justice irrelevant. The hypothesis posits that the clash between these perspectives has given rise to two prominent legal schools: natural law and positivism. Methodology & Framework, if Applicable The research employs a comparative analytical approach, juxtaposing the natural law and positivist viewpoints to assess their impact on the foundation of law within the Iranian legal context. Drawing on both legal philosophy and Islamic jurisprudence, the study navigates the divergent paths taken by legal scholars who either lean towards integrating Islamic principles with natural law or assert the primacy of positivism. The methodology involves a critical review of legal literature and a nuanced examination of the evolving discourse in Iranian legal philosophy. The framework of analysis encompasses an exploration of the intersections and tensions between these two schools of thought, emphasizing their implications for the Iranian legal system. This article endeavors to contribute to the nuanced understanding of the foundation of law in the Iranian legal landscape, shedding light on the philosophical underpinnings that shape the enactment, legitimacy, and obligation of laws. The exploration of these themes within the context of natural law and positivism offers valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of legal thought in Iran and its intersection with religious epistemology. Results & Discussion The culmination of this investigation into the foundation of law in the Iranian legal landscape yields three predominant perspectives that intersect and clash within the broader context of religious epistemology. The first perspective challenges the role of religion as the foundation of law, emphasizing the incongruence between modern societal values and legal principles derived from religion. It questions the legitimacy of a legal system rooted in religious doctrine, suggesting that legal norms should exclusively stem from human reason and societal norms. However, this perspective faces theoretical weaknesses, particularly in its reluctance to engage with the philosophical foundations of the New Western thought. The second perspective, while recognizing the significant role of religion in the Iranian legal system, seeks to reinterpret fundamental rights such as freedom and equality within the framework of religious doctrines. Though practically similar to the first perspective, it attempts a theoretical reconciliation by extracting modern legal principles from religious foundations. Nevertheless, it faces profound theoretical challenges, lacking a robust theoretical basis within Western philosophy. The third perspective, chosen by the author, confronts the foundational principles of New Western philosophy and critically examines the conditions under which modern rights, such as autonomy, can emerge. This perspective delves into the mechanism through which religion acts as the source of legal principles and analyzes its relationship with modern rights. In this approach, the coexistence of reason and religion is emphasized, with human access to universal truths facilitated by both intellect and faith. This perspective places a renewed emphasis on the intrinsic role of Sharia as the foundation of law, tackling practical challenges and reconciling the clash between reason, societal norms, and religion in the realm of law. Conclusion In conclusion, the inquiry into the foundation of law in Iran, with a focus on religious epistemology, brings to light the complexity of perspectives within the Iranian legal discourse. The examination of three distinct approaches highlights the ongoing struggle to reconcile the relationship between law and religion. While the first two perspectives grapple with theoretical and practical challenges in aligning religious doctrines with modern legal principles, the third perspective seeks a harmonious coexistence of reason and faith. Emphasizing the intrinsic role of Sharia as the bedrock of legal principles, this perspective proposes nuanced solutions to the practical challenges posed by the evolving dynamics of society, demonstrating a dynamic synthesis of religious and modern legal thought. This study contributes to the broader understanding of the intricate interplay between law, religion, and philosophy in shaping legal frameworks, specifically within the unique context of the Iranian legal system.
تبلیغات
