جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « Derrida » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

Due to the temporal gap between the author's childhood and that of the child reader, children's literature defies age limits and thus exemplifies crossover literature. Post-structural criticism and deconstruction are amongst critical approaches that can spotlight such contradictory gaps in a text. Mohammad-Reza Shams is a distinguished and influential icon in contemporary Iranian children's literature. In this research, a selection of his works has been examined by using Derrida's deconstructive approach. This research has applied a descriptive and interpretive method with purposeful sampling. Deconstructive features such as binary oppositions, indecidability, aporia, intertextuality, deauthorization, and iterability have been traced in Shams' works. Intertextuality seems to be the dominant deconstructive feature in his fictional world. The findings of this research indicate that Shams' works expose readers to multiple meaning and confront them with the unending chain of signifiers. Intertextual fluidity and multiple layers of meaning in Shams' fiction reveal that the implied reader of his works far from being a passive consumer of the text, is actively involved in the process of meaning construction.

What makes "children literature" different from "adult literature" is the role and position of the audience in children's literature. The creators of literature that is characterized by the childishness of the audience are adults who maintain their authoritative relationship in the work unintentionally. This point will inevitably lead to two-sidedness of children's literature. One of the methods that can provide a proper analysis of children's literature texts and respond to the dual confrontations of children's literature and at the same time show its depth is Derrida's deconstruction.
Using the method of deconstruction in the analysis of literary texts does not mean the destruction of meaning, but the concept of describing the instability and pluralism on which the foundations of the texts are formed. In this research, we intended to examine the selected works of Mohammad Reza Shams, with a poststructuralist reading and Derrida's deconstruction approach. He is one of the prominent authors in the field of children's and adolescent literature. Mohammad-Reza Shams has tried to write differently in his creative works by avoiding stereotypes.

In this research, we examine Derrida's poststructuralist and deconstructionist concepts, including binary oppositions, indecidability, aporia, intertextuality, deauthorization, and iterability and recognize these features and concepts in the selected works of Mohammadreza Shams' works. Mohammadreza Shams has implemented some of Derrida's theories in his creative works.
For this purpose, after the explanation of post-structuralism and Derrida's deconstruction, we have studied the poststructuralist reading of four works written by Mohammad Reza Shams for the teenage age group, from the two perspectives of indication and narrative, in order to show how they deconstruct themselves. These works, which are well attuned to the criticism of Derrida's deconstruction, include: Divāneh and Chāh; Sobhāne-ye Khiāl; Man, Man-e Kale Gonde; Man Zan-Bābā o Damāq-e Bābā.

The post-structuralist reading of texts can be done from the two perspectives of indication and narration. In the deconstruction of signification, the endless reference of signifier brings about the plurality of meaning and the birth of meaning; therefore, it includes the components of binary oppositions, indecidability, aporia, all of which indicate the absence of ultimate meaning. The deconstruction of binary oppositions questions the concepts derived from metaphysical thinking and creates a new interpretation. In the studied works of Shams, the author has tried to present a different and new interpretation by collapsing the opposites of sane/insane, man/his shadow, death/life, text/margin and man/woman.
indecidability opens the way for any decision and gives it the possibility to be different. In the works of Shams, there are many characters who are stuck in their affairs and do not have the ability to make decisions, and this inability sometimes involves the narrator as well. Aporia are the blind spots that prevent definitive meaning, and the text remains uninterpretable, like secrets that remain unsealed and questions that are never answered. In the works of Shams, there are many behaviors that have no reason and relationships whose nature is ambiguous. There are many questions that remain unanswered.
In the deconstruction of the narrative, the narrative is just one of the infinity of narratives that are being built and destroyed one after another. Shams usually does not use linear narration and cause and effect logic in his works, and the circular structure is usual in his works. In his works, we are usually faced with several narratives, and sometimes a part of the narrative can be removed without adversely affected the entire narrative; the seeming insignificance of the story itself and the importance of its plot and how to narrate it by choosing a non-linear, complex and irregular method are some of the features that perceived in some of Shams' narratives. The components that are investigated in this context are intertextuality, de-authorization and iterability.
In general, intertextuality means that no speech or writing creates meaning by itself, but its meaning is created by referring to other speeches and writings. The intertextuality in Shams' works are generally references to proverbs, folk tales, stories of prophets, characters from the Shāhnāmeh and other literary works, sometimes they refer to other works of the author himself.
In de-authorization, attention is directed from the author to the text. Therefore, it is no longer possible to claim that the text has a center or a point that can be considered the origin; the text is a combination of pre-existing fragments of text. The existence of this point of view in post-structuralism degrades the position of the author. Sometimes, by leaving the work of art incomplete or expressing the inability to create, the artist himself attested the invalidity of the author's role; In this situation, the text ends in a way that gives the reader the opportunity of different readings, or in the text, different endings are put in front of the reader to choose from. We see both modes in the works of Shams. In all these stories, we are facing an open ending. Sometimes this open ending is clearly stated in the text.
Iterability is the repetitions that are both similar to the repeated sign and different from it and make the reader continue reading; each repetition produces a difference. It can be said that Shams intends to establish a link between the scattered pieces of the narrative by bringing the repeated scenes, dialogues or events in his long stories. In addition to recurring factors in a story, some scenes or themes are repeated in several works of Shams, which is a sign of infinity. The existence of this feature keeps the narratives from being straightforward and definiteness.

The temporal gap between the author and the audience leads to two-sidedness of children's literature and adds to its complexity; however, this duality itself can cause binary oppositions and multiple meanings. One of the approaches of literary criticism that can show this duality is post-structuralism and Derrida's deconstructive approach. In this way of reading, new meanings and interpretations of the text show themselves and it leads to pluralization and generation of meaning. Mohammad-Reza Shams, one of the prominent writers in the field of children and adolescence literature, has tried to write differently in his authored and creative works by avoiding stereotypes.
In addition to the fact that the presence of components of deconstruction in the works causes multiplicity, discontinuity, and birth of meaning, the structure of the stories is also generally in a form that allows the reader the possibility of different readings. Sometimes the author gives several endings for the stories and gives the reader the right to choose. In the most cases, by leaving the narrative unfinished, he gives the reader the chance to determine the end of the narrative at his own will.
The plurality of meanings in Shams' works provides the possibility of several different interpretations for the reader. In fact, the works of Mohammad-Reza Shams directs the reader towards the plurality of meanings and the continuous generation of meanings by taking advantage of these indicative and narrative features. The intertextual fluidity and multiple layers of meaning in these works indicate that the hidden audience of the text is not a static consumer, but plays an effective and dynamic role in constructing the meaning of the text.

This article is an attempt to evaluate Derrida's discourse on the tasks of the university and also to discuss the unlimited possibilities opened up for the contemporary university by the deconstruction of conventional definitions of the university. Derrida attempts to open up different definitions about the responsibilities of the university and to recognize its untranslatable aspects in order to draw new horizons of understanding for the university from this standpoint and to open up new possibilities by deconstructing the conventional definitions of the university. Derrida attempts to open up different definitions of the responsibility of the university and to recognize its untranslatable aspects, in order to outline new horizons of understanding for the university from this point of view and to identify and overcome the parasitic aspirations within it by questioning and criticizing its distorted missions. The guiding question of the article is: What new identity and responsibility does Derrida propose for the university? What are his strategies for liberating the university from the subjugation of heteronomy? The main message of the article, which examines three of Derrida's central works on the university, is based on the observation that the responsibility of the university in his thought is multi-layered and complex, interwoven with philosophical, moral and educational concerns. The nature of the university is irreducible, indeterminable and unconditional and eludes any kind of dominant and dogmatic discourse, the question of the reason for the existence of the university, its unconditionality and the conflict between the faculties was also always an open question. Based on such components, the reflection on the deconstruction and deontologization of the university, its autonomy and unconditionality, constructions of otherness and the role of education and research, the efforts to expand interdisciplinarity, the place of new humanities and cultural studies, the need to think about the coming society, the philosophical, moral and cultural studies approaches that have emerged in recent years series of philosophical, moral and educational implications arising from Derrida's reading of the new tasks of the university.

This article deals with the analysis of the elements that break the foundation from the point of view of Derrida and the analysis of these elements in the articles of Shams and tries to reconstruct the pluralism of meaning in damaging the metaphysical ideas presented in Western philosophy and reach new meanings from the text. Shams Tabrizi's articles have the capacity to achieve countless signs and symbols for multiple meanings with consecutive semantic suspensions. The authors of this article, with descriptive-analytical method based on Derrida's foundation-breaking approach, examine some of these concepts such as the negation of the definition of the unit of truth, the death of the author, the semiotics of post-structuralism, the dominant ideology of the text through the negation of contrasts, values, etc. have done. In Shams's articles, in the field of negation of the definition of the single truth, the truth is not considered an absolute and single thing, but it is placed in the field of interpretive debates and everyone has their own interpretation of it. Contrary to the views of Platonic logos, Shams introduces wisdom and rationalism as completely incomplete in the path of truth and sees it as a veil for the seeker. He does not contrast writing and speech or presence and absence, but beyond these two, he generally considers speech and presence as a veil.

"Language" element and related issues are one of the most challenging aspects of philosophy and new critical approaches in reading religious texts. This issue is doubly important in postmodern critical approaches and especially the Derridian reading of texts, which is one of the tools of some neo-Mu'tzalites in reading the Qur'anic text due to the authenticity of the language in these approaches, and it has caused great challenges due to the difference in the way of looking at the language. It comes from. In this regard, the present research aims to "explain" two different views from the perspective of Derrida and Mulla Sadra in order to provide the conditions for the visibility of two approaches to being and knowledge through the window of language and the extent of the possibility of such readings with an analytical-comparative method. to check. The findings of the research show that according to Mulla Sadra's view of existence, knowledge, and language, and his belief in the system of formation and education, which is derived from three sources of knowledge, the intellect, the heart, and revelation, and the divine language has three creative stages. Considering the formative and legislative and considers human language to be sub-territorial, Derrida's view on the third linguistic level can be examined from this point of view, and due to Derrida's failure to proceed from the intellectual-philosophical method, he never from the "verb" stage (in the epistemic system of creation and Amr) has not gone higher.

For many years, philosophers have studied methods of epistemology through different approaches. The challenges in this area mainly focus on the question of the nature of the subject and object as well as their relation. These issues have led to two general but diverse movements: Idealism and Realism. Deconstruction, like its predecessor, Structuralism, is essentially epistemological. Structuralists conceptualised ‘structure’ in such a ways as to go beyond the subject and object duality. Deconstruction, positively and negatively, established deep bonds with structuralism. This study interprets this relation and argues that structure in structuralism is transformed into textuality in deconstruction. The difference is that the text is not as rigid as a "structure" and continues to exist as a flux. The constant evolution of the text as a whole eliminates the subject and object duality.  In this way, the concept of text acts as a bridge between linguistics and ontology. When Derrida discusses the text, he means any kind of being. This kind of being includes both concepts and objects. Derrida’s interpretation of language can be linked to the epistemological and ontological functions of language.

For many years, philosophers have studied methods of epistemology through different approaches. The challenges in this area mainly focus on the question of the nature of the subject and object as well as their relation. These issues have led to two general but diverse movements: Idealism and Realism. Deconstruction, like its predecessor, Structuralism, is essentially epistemological. Structuralists conceptualised ‘structure’ in such a ways as to go beyond the subject and object duality. Deconstruction, positively and negatively, established deep bonds with structuralism. This study interprets this relation and argues that structure in structuralism is transformed into textuality in deconstruction. The difference is that the text is not as rigid as a "structure" and continues to exist as a flux. The constant evolution of the text as a whole eliminates the subject and object duality. 

Derrida is a key figure in Poststructuralism – a movement proposed by philosophers such as Foucault, Lacan, Deleuze, Derrida, and others in the second half of the twentieth century. An essential component of poststructuralism is its critical approach to diverse fields and concepts such as ontology, aesthetics, linguistics, ethics, politics, and especially epistemology. Philosophers’ epistemology views fall within an expansive spectrum of divergent and convergent ideas. The question here is what is the role of poststructuralism, in general, and Derrida, in particular, in epistemology? Some poststructuralists regard Derrida as anti-epistemological; this seems to be a hastily conclusion in describing the relation between poststructuralism and epistemology. Poststructuralism studies epistemology at a deeper level and poses a number of fundamental questions.

The present article is a phenomenological-deconstructive study. It is phenomenological because of its debates on the essence of the phenomena. It refers to the origins of concepts and describes natural phenomena. This is a retrospective process which describes the formation of the phenomena rather than discussing their nature. On the other hand, deconstruction does not follow a predetermined structure. It expands itself and the text in accordance with the host text. It moves beyond Husserlian phenomenology to restate the untold narratives of the text.

Poststructuralism, before anything else, is an answer to its preceding epistemological approaches. Through a complicated dialogical relation, it borrows from its preceding approaches and simultaneously negates them. We can categorise all of the epistemological approaches before Derrida into two general categories of idealism and realism. Not only did idealist and realist approaches fail to solve the problems in epistemology, but they also added new ones, among which is their inability to explain the relation as well as the differences between the subject and object. This article claims that Derrida’s concept of the text and his notion of deconstruction answer to a number of complicated epistemological questions. The present research argues that the origin of the text is epistemological in essence. Deconstruction drives the text into a flexible context and undermines structures. The text is an all-encompassing integrated identity. Of note here is the fact that even this totality has its own limitations. Towering on the binaries, the text questions the structuralist signification and interpretation of language. It reveals itself as a being at lingo-cognitive horizons. The deconstructive approach to the text shakes the foundations of structuralist linguistics, ontologies, and epistemologies as it tries to interpret texts in endless processes. The text, therefore, is a context which perpetually deconstructs and constructs itself. Deconstruction challenges the fundamental premises of epistemology while acknowledging the complexity of the process of interpretation. It seeks to modify the traditional epistemological relations among the subject, object, and language and de-centralise texts in an attempt to make way for new and infinite semantic possibilities.

The present research has tried to interpret deconstruction as a means through which epistemology can redefine itself and look at the subject and the object in new ways. The primary aim of this article is to give an inclusive re-reading of the concept of the text and explore notions that are not explicitly treated in Derrida’s works. This can lead to a new understanding of epistemology in linguistics and semiotics. Also, this article discussed the issue of an epistemological reading of structuralism and the philosophical reasons behind its emergence. Generally, structuralism is a familiar term in epistemology and linguistic theories. Discussing the development of structuralism to deconstruction and poststructuralism and an epistemological reading of the development of structure to text have been among the main objectives of this article. These subtle but significant discussions can pave the way for a deeper understanding of literature and philosophy. Literature, in general, and literary theory, in particular, must always re-interpret themselves in fresh philosophical and epistemological paradigms to avoid reduction to simply verbal and rhetorical issues.

Derrida plays a significant role in introducing Saussure to the philosophical and linguistic discourse of our time. While dealing with Saussure's intellectual foundations and Saussure's influence on Derrida, this article aims to analyze Derrida's deconstructive criticism of Saussure on the issue of writing. Saussure, in the book of General Linguistics, by dividing the realm of language into two parts outside and inside, pushes writing out of the inner realm of language and considers it as the representation of language. Saussure considers writing to usurp the place of speech and considers it a marginal matter. Derrida believes that Saussure could not violate the metaphysics of presence by determining the limits of the inside and outside for language and the exit of writing from the inner realm of language. By proposing the concept of Difference, he refers to the independent aspect of writing compared to speech and removes writing from the subjugation of speech. According to Derrida, the arbitrariness of the sign can bring the signifier out of the subjugation of the signified and create multiple signifiers. According to Derrida, Difference indicates the possibility of continuous becomings in the text, and these becomings will bring an endless chain of signifiers.

This study examines “disintegration” as one of the types of tricks and arrangements that are manifested in short storied and postmodernists novels. “Mummy ” (MOOMIYAYEY)is one of Mojabi’spostmodern works that has a special place in terms of language, expression, structure and images. In this research relying on Derrida’s views and with a descriptive-analytical approach to analyzing the structure and qualitative content of “Mummy” (MOOMIYAYEY) and reflecting tricks the rupture is addressed in it in order to reveal further the unique dynamics and specific style of mojabi. The result of the research shows that Mojabi, in the role of a master artist, has broken the normal construction of words and created a seemingly disjointed, plural and at the same time artistic structure. By using various techniques of disintegration, he has created new, but not far-fetched, meaning ؛in such a way that the reader has the opportunity to participate in determining these meanings. The use of complex and confusing language, the arrangement of words without logical and content communication in dreamy and deconstructive formats are a featurehighlights of this effect.

For many years, philosophers have studied methods of epistemology through different approaches. The challenges in this area mainly focus on the question of the nature of the subject and object as well as their relation. These issues have led to two general but diverse movements: Idealism and Realism. Deconstruction, like its predecessor, Structuralism, is essentially epistemological. Structuralists conceptualised ‘structure’ in such a ways as to go beyond the subject and object duality. Deconstruction, positively and negatively, established deep bonds with structuralism. This study interprets this relation and argues that structure in structuralism is transformed into textuality in deconstruction. The difference is that the text is not as rigid as a "structure" and continues to exist as a flux. The constant evolution of the text as a whole eliminates the subject and object duality.  In this way, the concept of text acts as a bridge between linguistics and ontology. When Derrida discusses the text, he means any kind of being. This kind of being includes both concepts and objects. Derrida’s interpretation of language can be linked to the epistemological and ontological functions of language.

Basically, why does Derrida deconstructively question the current situation in the education system in general and the teaching style in particular? How the conventional teaching style is that active deconstruction has entered into its fabric and becomes its internal relation. The important issue in destructuring is both challenging the rigid structures formed in the educational system and teaching style and facing its silent possibilities. Teaching style, as a part of shaping the state of the educational system in the face of individual behavioral preferences, has the ability to manifest itself in the form of rigid and predetermined structures. In such a situation, deconstruction comes into action and, like a virus, disrupts the predetermined foundations of conventional styles and questions them. Derrida offers a new understanding of deconstructive teaching style in relation to teaching method. In the present research, first, the relationship between style and method is explained. Derrida emphasizes that deconstruction is not a method. The method is following predetermined rules, but deconstruction is the destroyer of any kind of external belonging. Therefore, he criticizes teaching methods in a critical way. Then, in the following, how to enter deconstruction as a facilitator in the education process and deconstruction teaching style will be analyzed.

Transforming the educational environment into a learning environment through combining education with new technologies and changing the role of educational components has been considered by educational thinkers. For this reason, the purpose of this article is to identify the poles of conflict in direct education and to provide strategies for empowering the disadvantaged poles. To achieve this goal, the six staged deconstruction method was used. The findings showed that there are changes in different dimensions of the direct education approach, including: 1- Changing the role of the teacher from a commanding mode and transferring knowledge to a facilitating mode of learning 2- Changing the role of the student from being passive and neglected in the learning cycle, to the active and responsible element in education 3- Changing the teacher-centered teaching method to a student-centered method such as project-based, exploratory, laboratory. 4. Changing the educational content from the monologue mode of the fixed book to the dialog mode and situations based on using the experiences of students, electronic content produced by both sides of the learning flow (teacher and student), social networks and internet sites 5- Changing the educational and physical environment of the classroom from its traditional state to a happy environment with maximum participation of learners in learning process, 5- changing the evaluation from the paper-pencil mode to a combination of different methods such as  using electronic and self-assessment methods. These changes indicate a change in the perspective in this regard that the necessary trend to change the education and the emergence of the flipped classroom approach has been provided. Using the features of the flipped classroom, we achieve a new concept of learning to meet the needs of the learners of the digital age.

Since the modernization of the Iranian school, the main question for reformers to deal with was how to interact and borrow from western education. Social reformers and educational activists have responded to this question and adopted a policy confronting it. The purpose of this article is to critically examine three moderate policies, namely: 1) Appropriation in the views of Mirza Malkum Khan and Mirza Yusuf Mustashar al-Dawla, 2) Selection in the views of Abdul Rahim Talibov, and 3) Instrumentalism in the efforts of Mohammad Ali Mojtahedi and Reza Roozbeh applying Derridean Deconstruction. Deconstruction shows that each of these policies has blind spots that have led to results contrary to the original intentions of their defenders. Appropriation, with its strong emphasis on commonalities, ignores the differences between the two systems of education. Selection has been inattentive to the gradual change of educational patterns by separating from their original context and the emergence of new interpretations. Instrumentalism with its focus on achieving the expected educational results has created an elitist system that ignores the unpredicted educational results and others marginalized by this consequentialism.

Although it seems that deconstruction disintegrates everything, it provides a basis for everything in Derrida's philosophy. As Derrida defines deconstruction on collapsing and rebuilding, event has no exception to this definition. Events, like Derrida's other discussions, are so intertwined that we cannot distinguish between them. But what is the event, and why is it an internal matter that takes credit from our internal and intuition? Why is it artificial? Derrida considers architecture to be an event type, and the style of deconstruction in architecture is an event definer? Thus, the explanation of Derrida's view of the event and its relation to art and architecture are manifested in features such undeconstructible, unpredictability of the event. For Derrida, therefore, the event is an instantaneous that even defines architecture in a "moment," and only from this dimension can it reach a consensus with architecture. In addition, deconstruction style in architecture takes us out of the ordinary cognition of form and space, and it can be an objective example of the subject of occurrence in architecture.

Deconstruction manifests itself in various forms: sometimes it is a philosophical position, sometimes it is a political and intellectual strategy, and sometimes it is a way of reading, but in general it can be examined from two angles: 1- deconstruction as a tool for textual analysis which separates the basic elements of a structure from each other in order to discover the relationships of these elements and to identify the contradictions and strengths and weaknesses of that structure, in a pyramidal manner and from whole to part. 2- deconstruction as a critical school and a philosophical and ideological current in response to structuralism. From Derrida's point of view, this critical-philosophical current is a constant exploration of the context of the text and hesitation and separation in all meanings, especially the meaning of truth, which derives its origin from Logos, and reveals contradiction, relativism, plurality, multiplicity of meanings, and the complete openness of the text to all possibilities and meanings, and accordingly, by emptying the text of external components such as context, author, history, etc., it removes any boundaries, sacredness, and stability from the text and ignores dualities and fixed principles and its truth. This method of reading the text, despite its fundamental and wide differences in origin with the cultural context and special conditions of Islamic societies, is used by some Islamic thinkers in reading Islamic texts. The present article, using descriptive-analytical method, employs an epistemological approach, in addition to the methodology of deconstruction reading and its philosophical and linguistic foundations, deals with the important issue of unbridling the relationship between the signifier and the signified, creates a great challenge in the field of Qur’anic text (here Surah Tawhid) which is due to the stark difference between two types of worldviews. Deconstruction is a human ideology that is not in harmony with the centralism and absolutism of monotheism, but is exactly the opposite of monotheistic and religious thought. Thus, contrary to the deconstructionist view that the value of "writing" takes precedence over "speech" and the death of the author and the multiplicity of meanings, in the text of the Holy Qur’an, as both the divine "book" and "word", rather than observing the multiplicity of meaning, we see the depth, breadth, and layers of meaning that are expressed through a specific and deliberate system, and in contrast to the precedence of "absence" in deconstruction, "presence" and "absence" in the centralist text of the Qur’an are simultaneously and proportionate to readers' level of perception noticeable.

In this paper, Derrida's viewpoint on the need to teach philosophy in schools and universities to improve the quality of student's thinking is examined. The development of thinking in students is one of the fundamental factors in the transformation of education, and teaching philosophy as thinking from Derrida's perspective provides the philosophical context for this transformation. In this study, descriptive–analytical research method is used. To explain the problem and answer the questions, a selection of the philosophical foundations of Derrida's thought is stated, emphasizing the need to teach philosophy for thinking in schools and universities. The findings suggest that teaching philosophy, which is according to Derrida a kind of education for thinking, necessarily includes thinking about the school and the question of what is the philosophy of education. Philosophical thinking should also be combined with thinking about _and beyond_ philosophy, to allow the university to practice philosophy and challenge it at the same time. Therefore, thinking, in the broad, affirmative sense Derrida ascribes to it, is essential to both school and university, then the two institutions should be placed along the same continuum, differing in degree but not in kind.

Jacques Derrida was one of the few philosophers who seriously became involved with architecture. Despite his innermost desire, Derrida seems to have never made a proper connection with architecture. As soon as Derrida's theory of deconstruction was developed in architecture, it was thought that a practical way to translate and represent an idea was found. Concerning the output of the deconstruction style, the feedback of that opinion in the design of architectural spaces demonstrates that it was a complete failure. It showed the reflection of Derrida's idea on architecture was based on a poor understanding. The aim of this study is how accurate and complete the style of deconstruction in architecture represented Derrida's opinion on deconstruction? Derrida entered the deconstruction style project in architecture to show that arts are the best objectives to represent the manifestation of deconstruction. Although other studies accepted the formation of the deconstruction style in architecture as the fact of Derrida’s deconstruction, Parc de la Villette’s project really contradicts his hypothesis. Not from an architectural point of view, but from a philosophical point of view instead, this study emphasizes the philosophical basis of Derrida's views on deconstruction according to his thought on texts. Accordingly, as a strong and steady connection, Derrida's deconstruction is a kind of exposure to our relationship with the world, while the architecture's deconstruction style breaks the connection and even disrupts our relationships with this surrounding world.

Violence is something that always happens in the real world and has many forms and types. This phenomenon is not limited to overt violence or physical violence, but also has hidden forms that are essentially hidden in language and speech. For example, the thinking and mentality of modernization and development at first sight reveals a desirable truth, yet in the world of thought and the resulting divisions one can discover traces of verbal or abstract violence. From this perspective, the leading article seeks to explore and understand the origins and origins of violence in Western theories of modernization and development, using Jacques Derrida's method of deconstruction. Derrida seeks to examine the dichotomies and contrasts in language by deconstruction method. Findings show that according to ontological determinism, epistemology and methodology, theories of modernization and development, as well as semantic distinctions and contrasts in their innovative concepts such as rational / irrational, tradition / modernity, developed / backward, savage / civilized, cultured / uncultured, urban / rural, poor / rich, etc. These theories carry abstract and fundamental violence or the same primary violence that they have the capacity and ability to practice. Become secondary violence or objective violence.

In this article, the critical works of Poornamdarian are analyzed and read with a philosophical hermeneutics approach. The question is whether hermeneutic philosophy has been the basis for the interpretation of literary works in this author's critical works. And if so, what hermeneutic concepts and themes form the basis of his work? Hermeneutic philosophy has penetrated in literary criticism with many of its themes and concepts. It seems that Poornamdarian has also used many of these concepts in his works, and many of the manifestations and ideas derived from this philosophy have been the basis of his works in the critique and analysis of literary works. The titles and layers of this article that are influenced by these concepts are: interpretation, semantic pluralism, symbol and allegory, demythologization in symbolic texts, deconstruction, grammatology, author death theory, intertextuality, ambiguity and Meaninglessness (ambiguity), apostrophe and Multifaceted, deconstructive and Multifaceted connection with didactic and theological poetry, Multifaceted and social commitment in poetry and literature. In his critical works, he has sometimes directly analyzed and studied these issues, and sometimes, as a special approach, he has so absorbed and digested and absorbed them in his works that he has appropriated them as a discourse.

To present a democratic reading of The Qur’an, Derrida introduces it as a book of hospitality and unconditional forgiveness. However, he considers The Prophet (PBUH) an exemption from this rule of hospitality. His reading of The Qur’an has not yet been examined by the scholars. The aim of this study is to investigate the reason for Derrida’s reading of The Qur'an and its separation from The Prophet (PBUH). In this descriptive-analytical- comparative method, the concepts considered by Derrida in the text of The Qur'an are examined and the epistemological status of The Prophet is analyzed on the base of the text itself. In this regard, "ontological" reading of the text of The Qur'an is used, which considers the text independent of the reader and writer. This reading is comparable to Derrida’s “deconstructive” reading since deconstruction emerged from ontological approach. This approach is similar to Allameh Tabatabai’s “Quran to Qur’an” approach which is suitable for Qur’anic studies. To avoid reducing the text of The holy Qur’an to a literary text the findings of the study in compared with the learned exegesis of Ayatollah Javadi Amuli. The findings of this study demonstrates that Derrida has ignored evidences in the text contradicting his reading, and as a result he has found the actions of The Prophet (PBUH) contrary to The Qur’an.

In many studies, the philosophical hermeneutics of Gadamer has been contrasted with Derrida’s deconstruction so as to emphasize their differences and oppositions. Pointing out the conceptual congruence between these two important contemporary interpretative currents, the present study, while acknowledging the differences in the works and writings of Gadamer and Derrida, empathetically attempts to reflect on the similarity and convergence of the singularities of their thought. Therefore, this paper discusses and explores Gadamer’s and Derrida’s views on concepts such as language and sign, truth and meaning, interpretation, and method, and attempts to show that the two thinkers come together in terms of intellectual relations, as illustrated by principles such as: Being is divisive and different in itself, the rejection of the transcendental signified, the emergence of the most self-sufficient language in writing, the risk of the creation of ambiguity and deception by speech and writing, the disbelief in a unified interpretation and truth, the concrete, and fluid nature of understanding, the creation of meaning, and the rejection of method. Thus, this study attempts to rectify some of the common theoretical misconceptions about philosophical hermeneutics and deconstruction.