درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

In this article, we try to examine virtue-based education with regard to effective factors. Virtue-based moral education lays the groundwork for a responsible and fulfilling existence in society by helping students develop moral habits and traits. With a focus on virtue-based education, the goal of this study was to determine the variables influencing how students develop moral virtues in the classroom. In terms of goal and methodology, the current study is a qualitative, applied, and foundational meta-synthesis. The meta-synthesis approach suggested by Sandelowski & Barroso (2006) was applied in this investigation. The content analysis approach served as the foundation for this study's information analysis methodology. In this study, 32 documents from the sources that were searched were put through a systematic analysis process using the PRISMA technique. Patterns were then found, and the results were categorized using the content analysis method. Several categories can be used to classify the elements that impact students' moral virtue development in the classroom, especially when it comes to virtue-based education: Intra-school factors: educational objectives, curriculum material, Formal and Hidden curricula, teacher and trainer roles, administrative procedures, school management techniques, relationships with peers and classmates, and the general school climate and culture. Micro-Environment Factors; This includes the cultural background of the school's location, the family climate, and the educational policies established by the Education Department. The macro-educational policies, the dominant religious philosophy and beliefs, teachers and trainers recruiting system, global changes and developments, and cultural tensions or gaps are examples of environmental factors that take place outside of schools. Lastly, there are the intrinsic and personal factors of students, such as psychological aspects, motivating factors, and their experiences and abilities. Macro-educational policies should be formulated in a way that makes moral instruction the focal point of a virtue-based educational system, rather than merely a subsidiary objective, so students with strong moral qualities can develop in this system.

In the face of the contemporary era's semantic, ethical, and identity crises, the need for a re-evaluation of educational foundations is felt more than ever. This research, drawing upon the philosophical foundations of Mulla Sadra's Transcendent Philosophy, seeks to present and elucidate a novel model entitled "Normative Education." This form of education is grounded in the existential transformation of human beings and within the framework of principles such as the primacy of existence, substantial motion, existential of gradation, and the teleological nature of creation. In this educational pattern, education is not merely the transmission of knowledge but rather a multi-dimensional existential process aimed at the intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and emotional growth of individuals along their existential journey. Normative Education, through the internalization of moral oughts and ought-nots, guides individuals from external obligation towards internal responsibility, placing them on a path towards the realization of their authentic and meaningful self. This article utilizes a Descriptive-Analytical methodology and an Interpretive-Hermeneutic approach. It first elucidates Mulla Sadra’s significant philosophical foundations and then, by emphasizing the potentialities for existential transformation, proceeds to formulate the proposed educational model. The implications of this type of education at the individual level include the deepening of self-knowledge, the strengthening of inner morality, increased psychological resilience, and the balanced growth of intellect and meaning. At the social level, these implications encompass the reduction of conflicts, the promotion of civic engagement, and the groundwork for the realization of a moral and spiritual society. Finally, while offering an initial critique and examination of this educational model the article emphasizes the necessity for its further development, empirical testing, and dialogue with other educational schools of thought.

The accelerated integration of digital technologies into education has renewed longstanding philosophical debates concerning the nature, role, and consequences of technology in schooling. While international scholarship has increasingly emphasized the importance of interrogating the philosophical assumptions underpinning teachers’ engagement with technology, little work has examined such orientations in the Iranian context. This qualitative study explores Iranian secondary school teachers’ implicit philosophies of educational technology and critically evaluates them through the conceptual frameworks of Andrew Feenberg’s philosophy of technology and Bernard Stiegler’s pharmacological perspective. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with twelve teachers and employing a hybrid deductive–inductive thematic analysis, this study identifies four Philosophical–Pedagogical Themes in Educational Technology (PPTET), each of which is revealed through the binary logic inherent in the pharmacological integration of technology in education. Through a Stieglerian reading, such dualisms are shown to obscure the constitutive and ambivalent nature of technological mediation in processes of teaching, learning, and individuation. The findings reveal a need to move beyond access-oriented and utilitarian narratives toward cultivating critical digital judgment and fostering pedagogical practices grounded in care, attention, and reflective technological engagement.

We cannot evaluate Kant's critical project without considering Transcendental Idealism, as it provides his solution to the enduring problem of metaphysics. Kant views transcendental idealism as a means through which metaphysics can follow 'the secure course of a science' (Bxiv), while also 'removing an obstacle that limits' (Bxxv) practical reason. The most contentious element of his proposal is his classification of empirical objects as appearances rather than things in themselves. This distinction restricts our knowledge to things as they appear, leaving their true nature beyond our cognitive grasp. In this article, I will explore Kant's concept of the 'thing in itself' and examine whether Allison's two-aspect interpretation is a valid representation of Kant's theory and if it effectively resolves its issues. The first part of this article will focus on Allison's two-aspect reading of the 'thing in itself' and his solutions to its paradoxes. The second part will address three objections raised by Guyer, who critiques Allison’s reading from a two-object perspective, and Kant's main argument in the Aesthetic. Lastly, I will evaluate the internal consistency of Allison’s interpretation and its alignment with Kant’s texts. I will conclude by demonstrating that, although (1) Allison consistently counters Guyer’s objections and (2) his interpretation captures the overall intent of Kant’s project, (3) it is not entirely consistent with Kant’s writings.

I take paraconsistent logic to be one of the most important and significant developments in logic and metaphysics in the last 100 years, challenging, as it does, one of the deepest dogmas entrenched in Western philosophy: that consistency is a sine qua non of rational thought. This paper looks back at the modern development of the subject. It is partial, in that it concerns only what one might call the formative years of the subject. It is personal, in that I describe my own involvement in some areas. The first part of the paper concerns paraconsistency as such. It starts with the name itself, its origin and its meaning. After a brief look at the history before the 20th century, it notes the work of the early pioneers: Orlov, Jaśkowski, Halldén, Smiley, Val and Richard Routley, and da Costa. For each of these, it describes both what motivated them, and the techniques they used in their constructions. It then describes the early reception of paraconsistency, and the way that it became a global movement. Next, the paper turns to dialetheism, again starting with the name itself and its meaning. After a brief look at the history of the notion before the 20th century, it describes the origin of the modern subject in the work of Richard Routley/Sylvan and myself. Finally, it turns to one of the major applications of paraconsistency: inconsistent mathematics—and specifically set-theory, arithmetic, and geometry. It notes the work of da Costa, Routley/Sylvan, Meyer, Mortensen, and others, describing some of the results concerning the mathematical theories they investigated.

Objective: To investigate how contemplative pedagogy—rooted in contemplative consciousness—can reframe educational paradigms by leveraging a neurophenomenological understanding of consciousness as an irreducible, embodied, and emergent phenomenon. Method: This study adopts a neurophenomenological methodology, integrating first-person experiential insights with third-person perspectives on neural, bodily, and environmental dynamics. The framework is applied to pedagogical strategies that foster contemplative modes of consciousness across four interrelated dimensions: internal awareness, embodied action, intersubjective empathy, and contextual systems. Result: Contemplative pedagogy manifests across four interconnected domains: 1) Internal dimension: Self-exploration and identification through “innernet” consciousness techniques. 2) External dimension: Enacted embodiment via processes of autopoiesis, emergence, and enaction. 3) Intersubjective dimension: Cultivation of empathy, compassion, and contemplative states such as emptiness and groundlessness. 4) Interobjective dimension: Engagement with social structures, extended systems, institutional contexts, and their influence on consciousness. These domains reveal how contemplative pedagogy intentionally cultivates consciousness in holistic and transformative ways. Conclusion: Framed through a neurophenomenological lens, contemplative pedagogy offers a rich, multidimensional educational paradigm that bridges consciousness theory and pedagogical practice. It underscores the potential for education to cultivate deeply embodied and relational forms of understanding, thus reframing learning as a transformative process rooted in contemplative consciousness.

Education in the 21st century is experiencing a steady and continuous shift. Learning is no longer confined to classrooms or outdated traditions; instead, it is shaped by technology, globalization, and the demands of modern society. Today, education is less about memorizing facts and more about helping students grow into adaptable, emotionally intelligent, and globally conscious individuals. As an educator, I have seen how digital tools, when used thoughtfully, can inspire creativity and make learning more inclusive. Yet, while technologies like artificial intelligence offer enormous potential, they also raise serious ethical concerns. This means we must prepare students not only to use these tools but also to think critically and act responsibly. The teacher’s role has also transformed. We are no longer simply transmitters of information but mentors and guides who help students navigate complexity. Emotional resilience, ethical awareness, and cultural sensitivity are now central to the learning process, not optional extras. Education today must go beyond preparing students for jobs. It should equip them with the mindset and skills needed to manage uncertainty and contribute meaningfully to their communities. In a rapidly changing world, schools and universities must serve as both a compass and a foundation, supporting personal growth and collective progress. This article, taking a descriptive approach, explores education from multiple perspectives, including curriculum, identity, technology, and the roles of teachers, students, and families. It also reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of past and present approaches, highlighting insights from well-known scholars to better understand the challenges and possibilities of modern education.

Contemporary Hegel scholarship either defends a theological metaphysics in which history is a teleological unfolding of cosmic Geist; or, the evolution of Geist represents the absolutization of human subjectivity, which undergoes a Bildung that prescinds from any reliance on metaphysical givens. The dilemma is between presenting Hegel as an absolute monist that is outmoded in light of modernity’s skepticism towards a teleology of history; or, of reducing Hegel to the terms of modernity, as defending the absolute self-grounding of the human subject, in history without ontology. I argue that co-opting Hegel for modernity is a mistake. The post-Kantian interpretation of Hegel, that rejects any metaphysics of the absolute, leaves the human subject in a state of alienation that the dialectic process in Hegel is supposed to resolve. I argue that PKI’s account of the self-grounding subject is too similar to absolute freedom that Hegel views as a dangerous fruit of the Enlightenment. Absolute freedom, having relegated God to deistic irrelevance, and stripped nature of any telos, seeks to make its own categories sovereign over those of reality.

A Hegel has been subjected to a variety of incompatible interpretations in recent times, from absolute idealism to realism, from pro-metaphysical to sans metaphysical. One of the more eccentric Hegelian thinkers is Slavoj Žižek, who believes that Hegel must be read as a radical materialist to clear the path to true human liberation. Žižek’s highly controversial interpretations of Hegel have gained a celebrity level of exposure and popularity and are mixed with Freudian-Lacanian psychoanalytic themes and post-Marxist anti-capitalist political-social ruminations. This paper will traverse themes in Hegel’s early religious writings through to the Phenomenology of Spirit to critically assess Žižek’s claims. It will support his assertion that Hegel was not an absolute idealist but will reject the claim that Hegel was a materialist. Not only was Hegel strongly opposed to materialism and rejected its most basic assumptions, but his dialectic evolves beyond this into a form of radical mysticism. Hegel considered naïve traditional empiricism, rationalism, and mysticism to be unfit for a new urban landscape in which science and technology were flourishing at an accelerating rate. He also wanted to defend philosophy and religion as independent fields which addressed truth, higher reality, and the greatest consciousness that the human mind could reach in the journey to surpassing its limitations.