جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "حصول علم" در نشریات گروه "علوم سیاسی"

One of the important issues in the proof of the lawsuit is the connection between them. Examining the similarities and differences and the quality of knowledge acquisition in each of them requires that, first, their meaning (scholarship and witness testimony) is explained, then the quality of knowledge acquisition in them should be discussed according to the conditions of each. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to point out the similarities and differences, after explaining how knowledge is obtained, because despite the similarities and differences, the relationship between expertise and eyewitness testimony is better defined, and the value of each, despite the type of knowledge in them, in cases Differently, their position is determined differently, and it can give the belief to any researcher in this field that the difference in attributes and symptoms prevents the possibility of comparison in the concept. The difference in the attributes and symptoms prevents the possibility of comparing the two concepts, explaining that despite the common essence, it cannot be said that the rulings of each of the two concepts are applicable in the other, so the knowledge of each of the experts and the testimony of the witnesses prevents us from examining It is not necessary to be precise about the presence of science in each of them. In expressing the similarities and differences, the best result that will follow is that it is not possible to put each argument in place of another just because of the similarity.