جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « western societies » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

Tafsir Al-Mizan and Fei-Zhal have explained social phenomena realistically with a new approach in the last century. These two interpretations have interpreted the verses of the Holy Qur'an with a rational and revealed basis, and in addition to other interpretation approaches, they have benefited from the characteristic and critical approach towards the existing social system. The main issue of this article is "similarities and differences of critical methodology in scales and shadows". This article has shown with a library and descriptive analytical and comparative method that al-Mizan and Faizal have criticized the existing human societies for turning their backs on the revealed source of knowledge and using only theoretical wisdom and relying on materialism. The distinguishing aspect of critical methodology in these two interpretations is the division of Islamic societies into (Jahili and Islamic) while Al-Mizan did not express this division while criticizing. Just as Fai-Thal has criticized Islamic societies on three grounds (nationalist, nationalist, and relations with the West), while Al-Mizan based his criticism of Islamic societies on (Westernism, ignoring revealed laws, lack of internal cohesion). and obeying corrupt rulers). In criticizing western societies and culture, he has considered and criticized factors such as (gender pleasure, lack of humanity, lack of spiritual freedom, body freedom, racism, arrogance and boasting, etc.) as effective. Al-Mizan criticizes Western society and its civilization because of the materialistic approach to existence and limiting the world to external and material levels, class distance, sensualism, instrumental rationality, the closed door of charity and the open door of hypocrisy and the lack of truth and virtue. ) has criticized. Keywords: critical methodology, Islamic societies, Western societies and civilizations, al-Mizan and Faizal

The research that has been prepared using the historical analysis, we have tried to analyze the social democracy, the question to be answered is whether the democratic process in the Western world, as the process is non-Western democracy? That outcome it was the democratic process in the Western world, completely different from non-Western societies are democratic process; Because the West from autocracy to a monarchy, and from the monarchy to aristocracy, and from aristocracy to Meritocracy, and the from Meritocracy reach to democracy. If the non-Western societies for reach to democracy, Should from the autocracy to a monarchy, and from the monarchy to oligarchy, and from the oligarchy to Patrimonial, and from the Patrimonial to aristocracy, and from aristocracy to Meritocracy, and from the Meritocracy reach to democracy. Law, as the heart of democracy in non-democratic societies, learn that, law enforcement agencies, are more important than the law itself. Thus, Between individual freedom and the election, there was a significant relationship. So that the, whatever is greater individual freedom in society, elections will be more democratic. And the election of the wider society, the freedom of the individual, would be more civil. Because the minority seeks to create a balance between individual freedom and collective equality so that they can play a role in decision-making and make decisions in order to rule in this way. If the majority wants to rule the society by holding elections, civil organizations, approving laws and publishing them, this confrontation, that is, the process of the majority method and the process of the minority attitude, will not result in the promotion and development of a democratic method and vision for the society.