critique

Despite appealing notion of research based language teaching, we argue that scientific way of conducting research on English language teaching (ELT) is problematic since it ignores language learners’ subjectivity, instructors’ professionalism, practitioners’ culture and learning particularity. Positivists pedagogical arguments neglect the social nature of meaning making instructional practices and emphasize objectivity and measurability criteria which lead to instrumental rationality. A critical discourse analysis of practical arguments proposed in pedagogical implications section of empiricist research articles revealed that positivists assumptions manifest themselves as the rules and regulations of carrying out scientific research. These yardsticks give power to the neoliberal tendencies to present reasons as premises of arguments to restrict and control the agency of ELT teachers as well as to deprofessionalize them. Since there is a close affinity between this paradigm world views and neoliberal policies, positivists research articles lead to the domination of neoliberalism on TEFL discourse. This indicates the ideological function of the article genre and awareness of that is crucial for the sake of democratic and fair education.

Cet article, en recourant à l'approche de Philippe Hamon sur L'Ironie littéraire, Essai sur les formes de l'écriture oblique (1996), a pour objet d'étudier l’ironie dans Les Choses de Georges Perec et les procédés qu'il met en œuvre pour montrer cette ironie. Dans cet article, nous tenterons d'illustrer que pour critiquer la société moderne dans laquelle la publicité joue un rôle important, Perec profite de l'ironie. En se moquant des comportements et des pensées de ces deux personnages matérialistes qui sont incapables dans la connaissance du vrai et de la vérité, l'auteur utilise des éléments ironiques qui donnent un ton ironique au roman. Pour ce faire, il se sert des procédés comme le narrateur hétérodiégétique, la polyphonie, l'intertextualité, les figures d'opposition, d’insistance, d'analogie et de diction. Les éléments qui instaurent une distance entre l'énonciation et l'énoncé, entre le narrateur et son discours, entre le lecteur et les personnages du récit. Les procédures qui produisent un sentiment de distanciation et d'absurdité, essentiel dans l'ironie du XXe siècle.

This article revisits Foucault's articles and intenne»s on the Iranian revolution. It retieius them in l(ght qf the foll01ving two contentions: (t) Foucault's interpretation ef Kant's essqy on '1J7hat is Enlightenment?'1 and his article "Kant on Enlightenment and Revolution n that evolve into Foucault's notions of critique and modernity and in conjunction uitb this, (iz) his other 1vorks such as Mrulness and Civilization, Discipline and Punish, The Order qf Things etc. that lead Foucault to the idea that T,Western modernity generates a conflict betiueen the 'other' and the 'same'. This becomes the basis for him to reject tWestern modernity and embrace the Iranian revolution as an alternative to T-Western modernity. These ideas are very much implicit in Foucault's indirect engagement nsth the Iranian revolution. Th01 become more evident in Foucault's JPritings on the Iranian revolution, though his account o] it seems to stand outside the narrative qf T-17estern modernity. U;7hether Foucault is rzght or ivrong in his perceptions ef the Iranian revolution is altogether a d/ffirent question.

Researching is considered one of the functional needs of the scientific community. However, this field of study is faced with a series of issues, such as the dismissal of the concept of critique as only a secondary phenomenon and the lack of a methodological perspective while dealing with the concept of critique. Thereby, after having an overview of the topic of literary and art criticism, this paper will attempt to argue that in the background of the discussion, the elements of “methodic critique” are ignored. Then, to distinguish the characteristics of methodic critique from that of subjective and non-academic critique, the eight elements of methodic critique will be explained in detail, which include: 1. Systematicity, 2. Model-orientedness, 3. Comprehensiveness, 4. Critical perspective, 5. Having philosophical basis, 6. Expert-orientedness, 7. Creativity, and 8. Being ethical. Undoubtedly, reaching a “(comprehensive) theory of critique in the field of humanities” necessitates an explanation of the necessities, definitions, and characteristics of the concept of methodic critique as avoiding the shortcomings of the study of critique in the field of humanities is impossible without a “theory of critique.”

Since Critical Rationalism is considered by some more of an attitude or mindset and by others a methodological approach to philosophical thinking and practical problem-solving, its application, or more accurately, its epistemological testing grounds, should be expected to be much more wide-ranging than they have been so far. With the exception of some published anthologies on Critical Rationalism and occasional nods to the legacy of Karl Popper’s falsificationist methodology, relatively few applicaions of a critical rational approach to contemporary theoretical debates in the social sciences have been published. I wish here to critically challenge the (optimistic) Hegelian and by extension the neoliberal view of the progress of American capitalism by reframing it with the Marxian notion of expropriation as applied to enslavement on plantations. The logic of enslavement as a process by which brutal exploitation has been practiced for centuries offers a falsifying test case of the rationality of capitalism and its promise of individual freedom of choice. This essay is an explicit exercise in the potential power of a version of Popperian critical rationalism being applied to the intersection of modern liberalism and capitalism, exploring the imbrication of a critical and rational analysis.