درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Justice has always been the most basic issue and the most important ideal of man since the beginning of civilization on earth, and for this reason, humans have tried to turn it into reality. Parallel to this importance, the thinkers of every age have tried to explain the limits and gaps and realize it. Because the lack of justice in the society causes the emergence of discrimination, oppression, corruption, and the lack of public consensus, and a society based on injustice and heterogeneity emerges. As a result, in order to pass from this society and move towards a healthy society where justice is based, idealistic thoughts are created to reach the desired society. This creates schools, movements and revolutions. This process shows the importance of the fact that in the process of the evolution of civilization, human beings have always had the concern of justice in front of them and it is not limited to a specific group or nation. People everywhere and at all times have the desire to achieve justice. In this article, while examining the origin of justice in the thoughts of John Rawls and Allameh Tabatabaei, this concept was compared from the perspective of two thinkers. Rawls from the contemporary West and Allameh Tabatabaei from contemporary Islam are among the most prominent philosophers and thinkers in the world who look at the concept of justice with different intellectual bases. But their theoretical output has similarities in the field of the concept of justice. In this article, using the hermeneutic recovery method, the challenges in the thoughts of Rawls and Allameh Tabatabaei in the field of justice were investigated.

The importance of the historical study of the Russian and Ottoman neighborhood policy lies in the fact that, in addition to the importance of these two countries in geographical, social, cultural, political and economic dimensions, a large number of Iran's neighboring countries were somehow under the control of these two empires before independence. In this research, the historical process of Iran's relations with these two important neighboring countries has been studied using the descriptive method and discourse analysis of Lacla and Moufe with the approach of historical institutionalism. The results show that during the lifetime of the Ottoman Empire until the disintegration of this empire, coinciding with the Safavid to Qajar governments, we witness two neighboring discourses. The discourse of the first period, the discourse of structural divergence, later with the change of political, economic and social geography and the requirements of the world system, this discourse turns into the discourse of minimal convergence. The discourse of "structural divergence" was formed on the centrality of the neighborhood policy based on the tyranny of the kingdom. The discourse signs of structural divergence included geographical dominance, expansion of religious ideology, political divergence, economic divergence, and world trade. The minimal convergence discourse is based on the centrality of the political signifier based on the court's understanding of global realities. The semantic system of this discourse is based on the main signs of acknowledging the existence of the neighboring country, the unbalanced weight of different aspects of the relations between the two countries, and the continuation of divergence alongside convergence. However, in comparison, the central sign of the discourse of the neighborhood with Russia is tsarist imprudence and court tyranny, and the main signs are passivity against Russia's expansionism, "military weakness in exercising territorial sovereignty, weakness in attracting the Iranian peoples of Central Asia and the Caucasus, and giving in to disgraceful agreements." they give. With the formation of the Soviet Union and the beginning of a new discourse, Russian expansionism in Iran in its territorial form ended and the chapter of ideological confrontations between communism and capitalism began. The discourse of Iran's neighborhood policy with the Ottomans and Russia is like two pieces of a puzzle that are both complementary and effective on each other's growth. If Iran's neighborhood policy regarding Russia and Ottomans had the same importance for Iran's ruling body, it is possible that a different historical path would have been established for the region and Iran.