pluralism

Asking about the place of religion in a democratic society refers straightforwardly to the kind of pluralism we adopt. Given that intra-societal tensions mark out a democratic pluralistic society, then it seems that there is no doubt that there should be a place for religion and religious people in it. What is crucial for a democratic society is taking a suitable view on pluralism. There could be, at least, two versions of pluralism: Incommensurable or radical and commensurable or moderate. It is argued that the incommensurable account of pluralism confronts with serious problems both theoretically (like the impossibility of outer critique) and practically (like replacing persuasion with force). Rorty advocates a commensurable pluralism based on pragmatic conventions or “know-how” skills without any meta-narrative or translation manual among the doctrines of rival views. However, along with Davidson, it is stated that some kind of translation among the rival views is inevitable. In addition, it is argued that commensurable pluralism could not be limited to merely know-how skills and it needs some know-that insights. This view of pluralism not only opens the door of dialogue, but also provides a basis for removing superficial differences or conflicts between the rivals. Real differences, however, could remain and should be tolerated.

At a time when religion has assumed a particular potency in shaping and defining inter-community and inter-state relations the world over, the need for evolving alternate understandings of religion to creatively deal with the fact of religious pluralism has emerged as a pressing necessity. This is an issue for concerned and socially engaged believers in all religious traditions. This paper deals with how, contrary to widely-head stereotypical notions, Islam can be interpreted to promote inter-faith dialogue and amity between followers of different faiths. This discussion centers on the work of a noted Indian Muslim scholar-activist, Asghar ‘Ali Engineer, seeing how he deals with the primary sources of Islam in order to develop an Islamic theology of pluralism and social justice. Given the fact that in many parts of the world today conflicts involve Muslims and people of other faiths, Engineer’s creative approach to the Qur’an offers us an alternate way of imagining Islam and Islamic rules for relations between Muslims and others.

The guiding question of this paper is “How can, if at all, the universality of human rights survive critical examinations within the prevailing multiculturalist frame of reference?” This paper examines the possibility conditions of critically reasoning for the universality of human rights. The discussions in this paper runs at two levels of analysis. At the conceptual level, a theoretical monist-pluralist frame of reference will be developed to reformulate the problematic of the universality of human rights in a form more compatible methodologically with multiculturalist approaches in the humanities, social sciences and current discourses of cultural studies. Demonstrating the weaknesses of the alternative solutions, the main hypothesis of this study suggests to refer to a reconstructed version of the “golden rule of reciprocal fairness.” At the practical level, this paper will set forth three “why”, “which”, and “how” questions regarding those principles which can bolster a universal reception of the human rights as fairness.  

  This essay presents William Wainwright’s conception of religious reasoning. He rejects the view that proper reasoning in religion must be limited to “neutral technical reason” (NTR), modes of reasoning that are neutral and acceptable to all parties in a religious disagreement. He emphasizes that religious reasoning, as seen in outstanding practitioners from different religious traditions, incorporates additional elements, such as appeals to revelation, emphasis on religious reading, rhetoric, acknowledgment of mystery, and especially “passional reason,” in which the arguments presented and the conclusions accepted depend essentially on the state of the reasoner’s heart. The essay goes on to consider how Wainwright deals with issues surrounding religious diversity: he rejects all of the standard methods by which it has been argued that differences in belief between traditions either do not really exist or do not ultimately matter. Special attention is given to religious pluralism, as advocated by John Hick and Peter Byrne. This leads to a consideration of exclusivism, in which it is held that the fundamental doctrines of one religion are true, and those of other religions, insofar as they differ from those of the favored religion, are false. Wainwright finds the standard objections against exclusivism to be ineffective or inconclusive. Finally, the essay addresses a question suggested but not resolved by Wainwright’s work: Does religious diversity have the consequence that truth in religion is not accessible to us?

Human cultural vision in religious rituals and ceremonies of different religions, denominations and sects is of such a difference that this difference sometimes puts them in complete contradiction with each other. Apparently, every religion speaks of the eternal principles that must be followed by that religion’s followers and seeks to raise reasons of the veracity of its own claims as well as the refutation of the claims of other religions in order to prove its own supremacy in the face of the inferiority of the other religions. Today, man needs to have an interpretation and perspective of these diversities and to offer a judgement of their veracity, rightness or deviance may it make the best choice in rational terms. Referring to the ideas of thinkers is one of the methods that can help the humans to identify or mitigate these challenges. Thus, this study aims at assaying the perception of religious other from the point of view of the human scientists. The approach of this research is based on the qualitative method focusing on thematic analysis, data collection through semi-structured interviews as well as the analysis of the findings based on the stages of the thematic analysis. The research field is constituted by the professors of the universities of Tehran city. Sampling process continued in a purposeful manner among the professors of philosophy and sociology up to 8 cases until the theoretical saturation. The results of the research show that religious other within Iranian cultural context includes eight sub themes: Sunni, Zoroastrians, Christians, Jews, Mandaeans, Yarsans, Derwishes and Baha’is. 

The s tudy methodology is a mixed research method that is contextual and semantic in terms of the data's nature; in terms of the logic of thinking, the s tudy method is deductive, and in terms of the analysis levels, it is analytical-interpretive. The selected s trategy of this research is grounded theory, with the preliminary analyses (qualitative research method) being conducted based on S trauss and Corbin's sys tematic coding using MaxQDA software. Then, in the second s tage, the importance coefficients of the topics extracted from semi-s tructured interviews were analyzed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) using Expert Choice Software. The research findings indicate that mos t of the respondents find "recognition and creation of emotional bond through the use of the pas t generations'' memories" and "the neighborhood's his torical form and shape" as two selectable solutions and, of course, in the authors'' minds, considering the population growth and increase in the demands for new houses in the intended texture and, consequently, increase in the number of cons tructions and the change in the city's countenance, these solutions seem to be somewhat illogical. "The necessity for amending the urban and regional criteria and regulations," and also, "enhancing the awareness of the designers and the area's addressees," and, subsequently, "reducing the influence of the designers'' tas tes" are the other factors that seem to be more widely applicable for they can prevent the emergence of visual abnormalities on the façades to a large extent.

The idea that science is objective, or able to achieve objectivity, is in large part responsible for the role that science plays within society. But what is objectivity? The idea of objectivity is ambiguous. This paper distinguishes between three basic forms of objectivity. The first form of objectivity is ontological objectivity: the world as it is in itself does not depend upon what we think about it; it is independent of human thought, language, conceptual activity or experience. The second form of objectivity is the objectivity of truth: truth does not depend upon what we believe or justifiably believe; truth depends upon the way reality itself is. The third form of objectivity is epistemic objectivity: this form of objectivity resides in the scientific method which ensures that subjective factors are excluded, and only epistemically relevant factors play a role in scientific inquiry. The paper considers two problems that arise for the notion of epistemic objectivity: the theory-dependence of observation and the variability of the methods of science. It is argued that the use of shared standard procedures ensures the objectivity of observation despite theory-dependence. It is argued that the variability of methods need not lead to an epistemic relativism about science. The paper concludes with the realist suggestion that the best explanation of the success of the sciences is that the methods employed in the sciences are highly reliable truth-conducive tools of inquiry. The objectivity of the methods of the sciences leads to the objective truth about the objective world.

 Religion has always been an inseparable component of political, social, and cultural life of Iranian people. Democracy as a western phenomenon has also been theoretically and in spoken as well as written form publicized in Iran for 100 years. The present article is an attempt to show to what extent religion has served democracy in Iran and vice versa. Elaborating on the type of interaction between religion and democracy in Iran, this article concludes that religion has believed democracy more than the latter having served the former. As a result, if religion had not entered the field of politics in Iran, it was quite likely that there would not have been any manifestations of democracy here.