جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « کنش ارتباطی » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

The purpose of this research is to explain and explain the role and place of dialogue and communicative action as a foundation in political participation. Since Nahj al-Balagha in Islamic societies is often considered as a source and reference for the actions and behaviors of people and officials, for this purpose, in this article, the communication actions underlying political participation in the themes of Nahjal-Balagha were studied. Therefore, the main problem of the research is the analysis of the role of rhetoric in the communication action that forms the basis of political participation. To answer this question, the method of qualitative content analysis was used. Considering that communicative action can play an important role in creating a correct view of interaction and participation in societies, the hypothesis of the authors is that Nahjalbalagha has constructive communicative action in political participation due to the comprehensiveness of its content. Finally, the results of the surveys show that Nahjal Balagha refers to the acceptance of two or more parties; The principle of knowledge and science, the necessity of accepting the differences of peoples, nations and languages, the possibility of achieving understanding and unity and freedom of thought and thought, observing the criteria of right and wrong, choosing the right path as the conditions for a favorable conversation, and also considering trust-building and competence of speech as the most important elements and Communication factors provide a very suitable capacity for the realization of desired political participation.

Unrest and protests and how to control this phenomenon are among the issues that have become particularly important for the officials of the Islamic Republic following the social political changes after the imposition of war in some parts of the country and efforts by the government to strengthen the security and police systems. It has been used as a source of social control. These protests followed a wave of theorizing about the nature, roots and consequences of the issue. Many analysts have criticized and analyzed this issue and have used different interpretations that indicate various and sometimes conflicting interpretations, which are under criticism and analysis with titles such as social unrest, social movement, new sedition, etc. Is. Examining the recent unrest from the perspective of Habermas' theory of communicative action is important since unlike positivist theories that deal with social issues with an explanatory view and seek order and stability with a conservative approach, in this theory Criticism is paid to individual and group actions with a social approach. Using the descriptive-analytical method and based on field reports and the study of library documents, this article raises the question that the unrest in the fall of 1401 in the Islamic Republic of Iran can be explained based on what component or components? It seeks to test the hypothesis that the application of communicative action theory is effective in the analysis of political and social protests. Also, the lack or vacuum of conducting research in the field of theoretical investigation of the causes of accidents from the perspective of communication action theory has been the purpose of this research.

Today, in addition to traditional diplomacy, countries have shown interest in public diplomacy and are trying to use it to advance their goals and support their interests. Iran is no exception and has been trying to conduct its public diplomacy in any region, especially Afghanistan, and in this way has used various tools and methods. Afghanistan is one of the target communities that can be positively affected due to its many linguistic, cultural, religious, historical and other commonalities with Iran. In this research, it has been try to pay attention to the concept of public diplomacy and to examine the public diplomacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Afghanistan. Finally, the factors that increase the ties between the two countries should be studied. This study addresses the question of what is the role of Iranian public diplomacy in post-Taliban Afghanistan in increasing ties between the two countries? The research hypothesis also suggests that Iran has used political, cultural, educational, and economic methods in its public diplomacy in post-Taliban Afghanistan, and that these actions have increased empathy and, consequently, increased ties between the two countries. To evaluate the research hypothesis, Zaharena theory of communication action has been used, which measures the degree of relations and proximity between countries using three indicators; Measures political, economic and cultural-educational relations.

The formation of society structures according to the structuralist view is created by the action between members of society and the production of similar signs in a system of signs. In relation to each other, these actions arrive at an "interactive order" from which the patterns, structures, and institutions of society emerge. Therefore, the process of community development takes place through these structures and institutions. Therefore, it is important to study the shift of the traditional and social structure of a society and its impact on development. The purpose of this study is to investigate the change in the social structure of Iran. The main question of the research is what effect the shift from traditional to postmodern structure has on the process of political development and the approach of international relations in Iran. The research hypothesis is that the change in social structure leads to the formation of structures and institutions of Iranian society that the concept of development emphasizes pluralism and human development rather than unity and economic development. Using a descriptive-analytical method and an integrated approach, as well as compiling a library, this study concludes that the change in the traditional structure that prevailed in the early Islamic Revolution and mainly in the form of specific roles of individuals and family system. He acknowledged that he portrayed the development of society as traditional and organic growth through the action of the postmodern structure, which takes place mainly in virtual human beings and in multiple and contrasting roles.

Public good as one of the basic concepts in political thought has not been independently explored so far. While this concept, along with concepts such as "public interest, public interest, public policy, public goods and common interests and common good", has formed the basis of most of the approaches and debates of different schools. In the popular discourse of political science, "public good" refers to those material, cultural, or institutional possibilities in which members of a community share interests. "Public good" is an important concept in political philosophy and political thought; Because it plays an important role in philosophical thinking about the public and private dimensions of social life. In this article, while recognizing and analyzing the concept of public good and related concepts; We examine Jürgen Habermas's views on the public good. Habermas considers the starting point of the concept of public good in the formation of communicative action so that this action should be based on the mechanism of dialogue ethics and the principle of understanding and communication is its main form. In this case, in a living world and communication system, one can imagine the formation of benevolent action in citizens, which leads to public good in an ideal society.

Modernity theories occupy a vast scope in the theoretical and research areas. Instances can be found in philosophical, historical-civil, sociological-historical approaches, and finally sociology of religion. Within any of these approaches some analytical methods and theories with specific names and natures have been developed. The current research started with the supposition that all these approaches in this big spectrum can be claimed to revolve around action and reaction concepts on one hand, and self-founded and communicative reason on the other. By using this framework, the aforementioned notions can be conceptualized and differentiated; that is the base for this study to analyze. The research hypothesis is that using modernity theories began with the self-founded and autonomic action and then was extended to communicative reason and interaction. In this passage, explaining the essence of modernity was transmitted from philosophy to sociology in form of a process by which the society was rationalized while conceptualizing reason made a passage through transcendental to instrumental and then to communicative reason. The focus of this research is on the exploration of this path with a historical-hermeneutical approach.

This study aims to introduce the Turkey's Europeanization, within the framework of "rhetorical action." It seems the "rhetorical action" that means using an organized collection of claims, which aims to persuade public audience and/or foreign and domestic opponents to accept actors’ preference and/or de-legitimize those of opponents, has played an important role in the process of the Turkey's Europeanization in adapting to the norms of the European Union. Indeed, in spite of the importance of "strategic action" and "communicative action", respectively means “utility maximization” and “reasoned understanding about valid behavior” in the Turkey's Europeanization, With the presence and continuous engagement of rhetorical action in Turkey, even after reducing the credibility of the European Union in the country's social and political sphere, and weakening the EU conditionality, reforms related to the process of accession to the European Union have more or less persisted. In this view, both the ruling elite and the opposition parties, along with civil society and the media, use "rhetorical action" in the sense of strategic use of normative arguments based on European norms and de-legitimization of opponents by these norms.

Jürgen Habermas talks about unfinished project of modernity. He believes that there is a way to emancipate from instrumental rationality. In fact, we could emancipate the modernity from fundamental challenges such as rationality crisis. He also believes that the communicative rationality has the capacity of human emancipation. He would use obligatory such as the critique of positivism, Frankfurt school and postmodernism; and divesting methods such as reconstruction of Marx’s theory and linguistic change.

The Islamic revolution stated the renewed authority of religion in various domains of life including government while the appropriate declaration of relationship between religion and government within the formal and informal patterns has not been successful and it has been along with theoretical and practical challenges. The aim of this article is the presentation of a strategy towards the interaction between the religion and government via thecorrelational action in the public domain as well as the interactive democracy away from the domination of authority and wealth. Through the analytical approach, the article states the critical theory on the basis of the communicative action and suggests the exchange of idea in the public domain to provide the interaction between religion and government in regard with the ambiguous and complicated affairs along with the public satisfaction.

In this article¡ historical events and cases happening from the constitutional movement to the tenth presidential election of Iran¡ suggesting formation or non-formation of communicative action¡ public sphere¡ civil society and democracy¡ have been narrated and compared in a comparative study based on Boolean algebras. This study aimed at better understanding of Iranian society and identifying ups and downs that Iranian society has passed on the road to democracy regarding to communicative action¡ the public sphere and civil society since constitutional revolution until now¡ and tries to answer this question that how the relationship between communicative action¡ public sphere¡ civil society and democracy can be explained? Accordingly¡ the theoretical concepts of the research were reviewed and extracted from views of Arendt¡ Habermas¡ Gramsci¡ Lipset¡ Alain de Benoist and Bashiriyeh to get indices and indicators for these concepts. Then according to these indicators the situation of the communicative action¡ public sphere¡ civil society and democracy in five historical periods (since the constitutional movement to the tenth presidential election) were narrated and analyzed. During the narrative analysis of each period of time based on the presence and absence of each concept exemplar¡ zero (low intensity) and one (high intensity) were placed in Boolean table for each historical juncture and the relationship between these concepts were studied. Based on the findings it can be argued that despite the attempts and measures done by society¡ elites and part of state or government¡ three concepts of communicative action¡ public sphere and civil society were not so strong except in a few cases. Therefore¡ in different historical periods¡ lack of one of these three insufficient conditions impeded realization of democracy in Iran. Among these five historical periods¡ historic period of nationalization of oil is the only time that Iranian attempts to reach to the democracy has got a fruit and made democracy possible¡ thanks to the communicative action¡ public sphere and civil society. During the constitutional movement the historical cases that had traces of presence of communicative action or public sphere and during the reform era historical cases that referred to civil society and public sphere are more than the events that lack these concepts. But in the revolution and tenth presidential election of Iran the historical cases referring to communicative action¡ public sphere¡ civil society and democracy were less than events referring to these concepts.

This study aims to answer the question that in different situations, which action is more usable? The main thesis of this paper is that, despite the importance of "strategic action" and "communicative action" that according to it respectively behavior is steered towards “utility maximization” and “reasoned understanding about valid behavior”, since the position of the international system at the same time has power and intrests relations and arguments and discourse considerations, for the international system actors, "rhetorical action” is more usable. In fact, in the situations of the international system, actors pursue their interests further through the pretense. In this view, the "rhetorical action" means using an organized collection of claims, which aims to persuade public audience and/or foreign and domestic opponents to accept actors’ preference and/or de-legitimize those of opponents.

In this article, we study incorporation in the ideas of Habermas. In philosophical and social thoughts of Habermas, theoretical incorporation takes place in three situations: incorporation between subjectivity and objectivity, between agency and structure, and finally, between deliberative democracy and constitutional democracy. The incorporation of agency and structure occurs at two levels. The first level is production and reproduction of life world, public sphere and civil society by communicative action and the second level is incorporation of life world and system. Combining the levels of subjectivity and objectivity as well as agency and structure is characterized by production and reproduction, while incorporating the life-world, "system", "deliberative democracy" and "constitutional democracy" is characterized by interoperability. These combinations allow a more prominent role to agency structure and also increase the capability of informal sectors compared to formal sectors in society.

The United States is trying to use media and cyberspace in a vast amount of tools available to help public diplomacy. This policy aims to attract and encourage both the American values on the one hand and the damage and weaken the Islamic Republic of Iran, followed in public opinion. The United States uses public diplomacy tools in its foreign policy toward Iran and the focus on exploiting this kind of diplomacy could be attributed to some factors such as a lack of traditional relationship between two countries and high importance of world public opinion in general and Iranian public opinion in specific. The public diplomacy and strategic communications experts within the U.S. government are exploiting the potential of new social media to gain the hearts and minds outside America, especially Iran in content of modern diplomacy. United States public diplomacy toward Iran, unlike the other country is lessen its sovereignty and undermine the goal of regime change from the perspective of their relationship with the people of Iran. American public diplomacy in cyberspace and TV channels is a new kind of violation in Iran’s internal and domestic affairs.

Public diplomacy has undergone great changes in the past years in terms of the model used for its implementation. As a result، the previous model which had been in vogue since the outset of the public diplomacy، is now considered traditional and is being gradually replaced with a new model. The transition from an image-based model of one-way asymmetrical communication to a dialogue-based model of two-way، symmetrical communication; the transition from an information framework which considered communication as a linear process for the transfer of information aimed at convincement or control to a relation-based framework which sees communications as a social process for establishment of relations and promotion of coordination; and the transition from monologue to dialogue in the process of influencing the foreign audiences are considered the basic elements of changes made to the previous model of the public diplomacy. The hypothesis used by the authors to explain the aforesaid changes is that rapid progress of communication technologies، on the one hand، and institutionalization of the idea of plurality of cultures، on the other hand، have led to this changes. The authors believe that the ideas of Jurgen Habermas about strategic action and communication action can provide a suitable theoretical framework for scrutinizing the transition process of the public diplomacy from its traditional to modern model.

Modernity has been interpreted from different angles. Scholars such as Derida and Lyotard talk about the end of modernity and the beginning of a new era called post-modernism, though thinkers like Habermas do not believe in that.Habermas who do not believe in the end of modernity and the beginning of post-modernism, finds modernism as the only way to human liberty who has chosen a wrong path and asserts that its superficial face should be reconstructed. In the search to find a solution for this situation, Habermas proposes two matters: “dialog in the public domain” and “Dialogic democracy theory”. His theory has attracted criticisms which are of considerable importance in political thinking domain. Lyotard criticized Habermas’s “dialogic democracy theory”, particularly the concept of oriented integration in this theory. The purpose of the present article is to criticize Habermas’s theory. We made use of analytical research method since the aim of our research was to analyze and probe into Habermas’s theory, our criticism on that with regard to the original text and its interpreters. Therefore this research is to clarify two important concerns: first to distinguish the kind of school in which these scholars fit, say, modernism or post- modernism and second their different perspectives toward issues of “language’ and “linguistic turning’.In fact Habermas uses communicative and dialogic language, while Lyotard make use of ‘language plays” and “linguistic relativity”. Ultimately Lyotard’s criticism of Habermas’s theory is based on this “linguistic relativity”.The final purpose of the present research is to analyze Habermas‘s dialogic democracy theory in a comprehensive way and to show its unique position in Habermas‘s liberal thinking.

The goal of this paper is to critically analyze models of religion and state relationships on the part of religious intellectual movement and to propose an alternative model for the current theoretical model in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Thus, at first, the basic concepts of this research such “critical method”, and “religious intellectualism” are defined and then the theoretical model of religious intellectualism is explained. The goal behind religious intellectual movement is to reconcile religion and modernity. As a result, the writer modifies both to create a new combination. The followers of this model are against the separation of religion from politics and agree upon the separation of religion from state. The paper critically evaluates their theoretical model of religion and state relationships on the basis of various approaches such as the theory of communicative action.

Evaluation of different aspects of modern society by using two concepts of “lifeworld” and “system” is one of the most important social-philosophical efforts made by Jürgen Habermas during 1970s. The main argument here is the fact that every social system needs a minimum of cohesion without which it will face crisis.However this social cohesion is not merely a product of system requirements. It also must be regarded as a language-culture phenomenon in which language and culture play a role. Expanding of the system in a variety of social spheres has shaken the foundations for such a cohesion. The article suggests that with a few modifications too this theory one can study the current Iranian society.