جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "سلطنت" در نشریات گروه "علوم اجتماعی"

Divorce celebration is an emerging phenomenon that is expanding in today's society, especially in big cities. In addition to being investigated in terms of social and psychological effects, this type of events should also be explored for the Sharia. Especially since the majority of the great authorities of taqlid did not mention its ruling. This research, which was carried out using a descriptive and analytical method, shows that the positive evidence for the permission or negation of this emerging phenomenon has not been analyzed; Therefore, although due to the principle of obscenity, perhaps the permission of such a phenomenon comes to mind; However, due to the importance of this category and the existence of undeniable corruptions and consequences resulting from its promotion, it is necessary; The evidence should be examined. But from the three imagined points of view, permissibility, sanctity, and promises in detail, based on the criticism and examination of the evidences of each, it seems that based on the implication of some evidences such as similarity to the infidels and the rule of negation of the mustache, the verdict of non-permissibility is stronger.

The late Dr. Davood Farihi and Dr. Seyed Javad Tabatabai, two former professors at the Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, each claimed to have an idea about Iran that had taken the form of a kind of intellectual controversy in recent years. After years of theoretical discussion about the decline of Iran, Tabatabai finally looks at the issue of Iran's decline from the position of Iranshahri political thought. Dr. Davood Farihi reads the problem of Iran under the neglect of a change in political thought during the constitutional period that occurred in the Shia world, and that is constitutionalism with the narration of Mirza Naini. The seeds of disagreement between Farihi and Tabatabai on the issue of the method were sown. Farihi's reading of political jurisprudence was influenced by his discourse understanding of the relationship between knowledge and power, which contrasted him with Tabatabai's linear and evolutionary view. Farihi sought to show how the political logic and knowledge relations that govern a particular region of the world, the Islamic world of Iran, differ from its Western counterpart, and it was evident that such a view, by Tabatabai's analysis of degeneration as a kind of backwardness Remaining in linear history was inconsistent with modernity. In this regard, Farihi was strongly influenced by the tyranny and division of knowledge in Islamic civilization. Jaberi, following the discussion on the intellectual and cultural heritage of the Islamic world, divided knowledge in Islamic civilization into at least two eastern and western regions and tried to show that the logic governing knowledge in the East of Islamic civilization is different from the logic governing The West is the world of Islam. Since each of these two respected professors looked at the Iranian problem from a different angle, in recent years, their intellectual tolerance has turned into an intellectual conflict, and each of them has directly criticized the other in his recent works. While examining this intellectual conflict, this article claims a kind of oneness between the critique of both masters; In fact, both professors accuse each other of single theoretical negligence. This article will examine the different aspects of this similar logic.

The issue of legitimacy in the history of Iran is one of the issues that has attracted the attention of historians in recent decades. One of the most recent of these works is "the evolution of the foundations of the legitimacy of the monarchy from the Mongol invasion to the rise of the Safavids." This work examines the evolution of the foundations of the legitimacy of this period in the context of a pervasive crisis of legitimacy in the form of multiple models, emphasizing that with the fall of the caliphate and the arrival of the Mongol element, the complexity of the foundations of legitimacy doubled and new inspiring foundations. It was raised for legitimacy. In addition, after the fall of the Ilkhanate, almost all special orders and organizations were damaged. Governments, with numerous features and characteristics, used various legitimizing models to justify their sovereignty. Thus, governments faced a crisis of legitimacy on the issue of the foundations of legitimacy. This article aims to critically review the above work. This study shows that the crisis of legitimacy was a major issue in the period under review, but the patterns of legitimacy were by no means based on a single pattern, but on a multifaceted, composite, and simultaneous pattern, but important indicators such as the Iranian idea of ​​monarchy; Farah Izadi and Farah Kiani were ignored. The work is weak in terms of methodological foundations and definition of concepts and has not been able to conceptually design a comprehensive multidimensional model for the period.