جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "perspective" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

These models can be specifically used by financial institutions and banks. To achieve this goal, the researcher has used quantitative and qualitative methods The research method consists of developmental and practical goal and mixed research approach (quantitative and qualitative). Therefore, at first, in a library, the criterions were indicated after surveying 34 reliable and global cultural models and also organizational excellence patterns. At first step, by using questionnaire to collect information at the qualitative stage, main groups of the template were delineated purposefully from 15 professors of human resource and cultural management field (homogeneous group). Then by using the Fuzzy Delphi method on 30 university professors, managers and experts in human resources and banking (heterogeneous group), main groups, subgroups and indicators were identified. The lowest value, the most appropriate amount and the highest number of privileges were given. The information were collected by analyzing the content and compiling a checklist and the basic research model was compiled by applying the Delphi method Data analysis in the qualitative section was performed using Delphi method and Soft Excel software and in the quantitative section, the data were analyzed with the aid of SPSS24 software and LISREL. Finally, Excellence Model of Organizational Culture was identified in 6 main groups, 24 sub-groups and 114 indicators as a suggested model of organizational culture for the Rehab Bank.
 

Scenic design has always been considered as the result of combining two areas of art and science. One of the fundamental areas that enrich the scenic design is the philosophy. The realm that can act as the third side of the perfection triangle in the scenery enters into the action and leads to the development of this visual field in theater and performing arts. This paper has an attempt to suggest the idea by a brief glimpse of Anaxagoras' philosophy that philosophy and some of its fundamental concepts can be exploited directly in theater scenery and further develop and deepen it. For this purpose, Anaxagoras is considered as a unique example of addressing such an idea. On the one hand, he had a complete and immediate acquaintance with Greek theaters and theater plays including Euripides and on the other hand was considered as one of the great scholars and philosophers of ancient Greece. In other words, Anaxagoras can be lonely as the primitive explanatory and the foundation of the idea is the triangle of philosophy art and science in theater scene. What is obvious is that it is impossible to address all aspects of Anaxagoras's philosophical and scientific theories in this research and the author has attempted to briefly introduce some general concepts of the ideas of this Greek philosopher and adapt them to the process of creating theatrical scenery.

The Philosophy of Thomas Nagel, the American philosopher, includes a varied expanse of philosophical problems, from mind to political philosophy; but the relationship between all these varied and multiple philosophical realms in his thought is the subjective and objective Issue. Man’s ability to look at the philosophical issues from the objective and subjective perspectives and the contradiction of these two perspectives create a collection of philosophical issues, whose resolving and understanding from his point of view is not possible without paying attention to the objective and subjective look. In this article, I have tried to present an explanation and elucidation of Nagel’s look at the objective and subjective issue and to clarify the meaning of Nagel’s objectivism. Based on the two books, “The View from Nowhere” and “The Last Word”, I would show how Nagel’s objectivism has developed. According to this analysis, Nagel’s objectivism has two forms: the objectivism based on an objective self that can separate oneself from specific and limited perspectives and acquire a more comprehensive understanding of self and reality; and the objectivism based on the
human mind structure, which is limited to the specific epistemological restrictions in looking at the world and even doubt in the foundations of one’s knowledge, that is the very limitations resulted from the thoughts that are impossible to escape from. Then, I will touch upon the point that these two perceptions of objectivism and the claim that in some philosophical realms one should use the first type and in some other realms the second type, would initially create a kind of inconsistency in Nagel philosophy but attention to the general framework of Nagel’s objectivism can resolve this inconsistency

The three concepts of "approach", "Method" and "Paradigm" are inserted to the methodology of religious researches from philosophy of Science. Not paying exact attention to the concepts, their referents, or even their translation has created confusion in the methodology of religious researches such that these concepts are considered synonyms at times, or with different meanings at other times or are used in place of one another. It is necessary to exactly define the three concepts to remove this methodological flaw and to draw an appropriate methodological pattern to explicate the position of each concept in religious researches. Unlike experimental sciences, there is a kind of interaction between paradigms, approaches, and methods in religious studies. Paradigm determines necessary and proper methods and approach in religious researches. On the other hand, knowledge of paradigms is based on the knowledge of approach and methods. This causes different answers to a single issue in different paradigms. Religious approach and methods also have a dynamic relation and a generative interaction and every approach should have its own special methods. Every paradigm needs its proper approach and every approach needs its own special methods.

Rationalityis a subject-matter for what pertains to epistemology, axiology, and belief justification. It deals mostly with the clarification of truth (and its criteria) and evaluation criteria of human miscellaneous sciences. The aim of this article is to offer an explanation for Foley’s comprehensive schema for rationality. Denying the possibility of a necessary relationship between theory of knowledge and justified belief, he takes some strides in completing and modifying the primary project of Aristotelian telos-oriented conception of rationality. Having illustrated the mentioned strides, this article will elucidate Foley’s two requisites for the comprehensiveness of rational evaluation (taking into account of individual’s all goals including theoretical and practical ones, and deconfining the adopted perspective). With due careful attention to the important role pragmatic goals and reasons play in Foley’s schema, this article strives to illustrate the fact that how the mentioned reasons bear indirect impacts upon the rational evaluation of phenomena, and do the same upon the characterization of necessary criteria for justified belief. The current impact is pertaining to the subject to-be-believed and the believer’s social role. The result and conclusion of this article is to introduce Foley’s theory as a relatively comprehensive and efficient understanding of rationality; a theory toward which there have simultaneously been raised some objections including yielding relativism, over-leniency, neglectfulness to social objective criteria, unapologeticity, instrumentalism, and neglectfulness to other kinds of rationality other than rational one.

Contemporary philosophy is replete with various theories about rationality; however، the general concept of rationality is ambiguous. Through exploring into the renowned schools of epistemology and philosophy of science، Richard Foley finds out the purpose and perspective to be constant elements in all theories of rationality. The purpose is the entity needed or desired by the individual and can be either practical or theoretical. The perspective is a collection of ideas and its various types are determined in relation to the person or persons holding these ideas. Presuming the purpose-centeredness of the concept of rationality and negating the premium perspective، Foley undertakes to plan the theory of rationality and draws the conclusion that، depending upon the purposes and interests، rational evaluation is possible from various perspectives. Therefore، the rationality assumptions in reality have different topics and are not regarded as competitive. He deems as appropriate the provision of the comprehensive planning of rationality with the fulfilment of two requirements: inclusion of all the purposes and not presuming as premium the adopted perspective. The basic criticisms raised against Foley are: relativism، non-defensiveness، instrumental look at rationality، and leniency.

In Ideology and Utopia(1936), Mannheim expresses the constituents of sociology of knowledge. He believes that the process of knowledge is influenced by social processesthat is socialprocess penetrates deep into perspective of thought. Sociology of Knowledge is the theory of the social determination of knowledge except scientific knowledge. In The structure of Scientific Revolutions(1962),Thomas Kuhn uses similar method to study of scientific knowledge. He showssociological constituents have a big effect on the formation and development of science.This article is comparative study of Kuhn’s theory about scientific knowledge and Mannheim’s sociology ofknowledge.

Philosophical hermeneutics is a theory of knowledge initiated by Martin Heidegger and developed by Hans-Georg Gadamer. Later philosophers، from Schleiermacher to Hirsch and Ricoeur، have studied the process of text interpretation and proposed some methods in this regard. Muslim thinkers on jurisprudence and exegesis have also devoted attention to the process of text interpretation. However، only a few thinkers such as Rumi have addressed the manner in which interpretation takes place. A prominent Muslim thinker، Muhammad Taqi Ja’fari holds special views on text interpretation in different discussions، in particular epistemological ones. This article seeks to interpret his views using philosophical hermeneutics and compare and contrast them with Gadamer’s views on prejudice، language، historicality، and fusion of horizons.