درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

With the expansion of natural sciences from the 15th century and the stagnation of the humanities in the 18th and 19th centuries, debates emerged among scholars regarding whether the humanities follow the rules of natural sciences or have their own distinct principles. Some thinkers believed that if the humanities adhered to the methodologies of natural sciences, they would be similar to them; others believed that the humanities have their own specific methods. The latter group strove to establish the foundations for legitimizing the humanities. In Iran society, influenced both by philosophical and methodological debates in academic circles and by the ideological and intellectual climate following the intellectual situation of Iran society, various interpretations of the humanities emerged. Among the Iranian thinkers who theorized about the humanities, influenced by these conditions, are Reza Davari Ardakani and Abdulkarim Soroush. The present study aims to examine the concept and methodology of the humanities in the thoughts of Iranian thinkers, focusing on the opinions and ideas of Reza Davari Ardakani and Abdulkarim Soroush. Reza Davari Ardakani and Abdulkarim Soroush, on one hand, were influenced by the intellectual and methodological debates of scientism and hermeneutics in international academic circles and, on the other hand, by the intellectual atmosphere of Iran society, engaged with the subject of the humanities. Reza Davari Ardakani regards the humanities as a product of the crisis of Western modernity, while Abdulkarim Soroush considers humanity method to be the same as that of natural sciences and understands it based on this method.

Since its establishment, the Islamic Republic of Iran has faced various political challenges. In some instances, certain crises appeared sufficient to topple the regime, yet through crisis management by Iran''''''''s leaders, conditions eventually led to the stabilization of the revolution. The present study aims to explore the methods of the Supreme Leader and the model for addressing the political challenges of the Islamic Republic. The main research question is: ‘Does the Supreme Leader have a comprehensive model for managing political crises?’ To this aim was used qualitative-descriptive method, employing document analysis and targeted sampling through interviews with experts. Content analysis of these interviews has also been conducted to identify the components of the research. Results: The study of methods and actions within the framework of crisis leadership was conducted based on indicators of control, mobilization, spiritual influence, and informed management of events. After interviews with experts, the findings were categorized into four levels: Preventive measures and challenge identification, decision-making, confrontation and management of challenges and crises, shaping awareness and conceptualization, learning, and delineating crisis lessons. Key components include: Macro-level policymaking, information assessment and awareness, management of destabilizing events, decisive confrontation with crisis-inducing factors and conditions, leadership of public opinion, clarification of citizens’ and institutions’ responsibilities, utilization of the spiritual influence of the Supreme Leader, discourse formation, conceptualization, education, foresight, and further elaboration.

Before the introduction of modern Western civilization, education in Iran was primarily under the control of the clergy and considered one of their main responsibilities. With the arrival of Western culture and civilization in Iran, particularly during the Pahlavi era, formal education, like many official governmental institutions, came to be managed by graduates of the new educational system. As a result, today some people view the clergy's involvement in official education as unconventional. The central question of this research is whether, with the formation of new schools and the informal status of old schools during the Pahlavi period, the clergy still played a role in formal education. The author's investigation indicates that a comprehensive and focused study on this topic has not been conducted. Although various academic works have touched upon the role of religious movements and clergy during the Pahlavi era, as well as memoirs related to active clerics in this area, these references are scattered and lack coherence. The present study, by descriptive and historical analysis methods, aims to explore this issue in historical documents. The findings indicated that after the reign of Reza Shah and with the opening of the political and cultural atmosphere, Shia scholars and clerics undertook two fundamental actions to play their role in education: The first was a gradual reform of the government’s new education system, conducted in four stages: Requesting the inclusion of religious subjects in schools, selecting suitable teachers for instruction, separating girls' and boys' schools, and the writing of textbooks by clerics with their presence to teach these books. The second action was the establishment and management of new private schools by clerics. This involvement of the clergy provoked a reaction from the Pahlavi regime, resulting in pressure on these schools and even the closure of some of them.

One of the most important issues in the economy is the role of government in the process of eco-nomic growth and development. Production is a complex and social activity that requires all its con-texts and resources to achieve proper production for society. Therefore, the issue of importance is the manner and quality of government intervention in matters related to the economy and the wel-fare of the people, not the extent of this intervention. In Iran, there is always disagreement among thinkers on which institution is responsible for development. For some, the government has a duty to take the lead in development and to push it forward, but for others, the government is not a good institution to promote development. These groups play a minimal role for the government. This study, by comprehensively examining these two different approaches, examines the views and ideas of three prominent scientists and experts in the field of political economy and focuses on the role of government in development. Azimi introduced development in a more general way and believed that complete development is not possible without the development of all structures. According to him, in the developed world, structural guidance (structuring in the presence of technical domi-nance) is unnecessary and short-term guidance is necessary. The importance of the government in the development process is so great in the idea that the main and most important institution of de-velopment is the "government based on democracy"; And he puts the judiciary and the media in the next ranks. Reiis Dana considers the state to be class in nature and does not examine the state sepa-rately from the global relations of capitalism. This lack of attention has always caused development in a fragmented, unbalanced and unsuccessful country. According to Reiis Dana, development in Iran is due to the development of capitalism, because capitalist development in the world is growing unevenly. Nili believes that government intervention in development, in addition to inefficiency, deprives people of their freedoms. Therefore, Nili looks at the issue from another angle and defends government restrictions on the economy and development by prioritizing freedom over social jus-tice.