from the perspective of Liberalism, no absolute right to freedom of opinion and the highest human value. Some theorists of this school such as John Locke, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill believe Each of humans in their lives have been completely free and their criteria for freedom, not having harm to others. On the other hand, the foundations of Islam, and is not targeted by about freedom in Sharia is set in which the interests of the people, especially in in future materials is also discussed. This article that the main issue with-style analysis is that although some bases, such as Liberalism, freedom and justice in the foundations of Islam and also approved, but the fundamental differences in concepts such as as the government, law, a matter of of fact, privacy, thinking and expression, the earthly life and cognitive range between the two men in this document.

The purpose of study was to analyze and critique the principles of educational liberalism and educational neoliberalism in order to present a new concept (synthesis). The research method was comparatively qualitative and methods of data collection and analysis were documentary and conceptual analysis respectively. The first findings focus on critique of educational liberalism and include issues such as mere attention to elitism, lack of attention to the needs and interests of learners, training entrepreneurs, and developing skills for learners. Other finding of study is the critique of educational neoliberalism due to monopolistic individualism, preference for capitalist ethics, and commercialization of education. Re-conceptualizing (Synthesis) of educational foundations of these two philosophical schools led to the presentation of combined principles, such as internal-external freedom, human-economic wisdom, excellence-centered & welfare – axis life, theoretical- practical sciences, knowledge-oriented /professional-oriented education, value-driven & life - centered training and public-elite education. The important point is that reconceptualization can be considered hierarchically and this uneven interaction can be arranged like Maslow’s pyramid. In this pyramid, the foundations of educational neoliberalism are at the base of the pyramid (low level needs) and the foundations of educational liberalism (high level needs) are at the top of the pyramid.

The current study investigates the concept of educational justice as well as principles for the distribution of educational good from the view points of John Rawls as the representative of liberalism and Michacl Walzer as the representative of communitarianism. To this end، the current study has applied methods of conceptual analysis as well as comparative analysis. The obtained results show that educational justice has had different meanings and educational implications in various cultures and times. John Rawls’ royalty to the doctorine of egalitarian liberalism and justice principles posed by him has resulted in a notable status for individuality and equality. Moreover، Walzer’s preference of the society to the individual marks him as a true supporter of the public and equal education in the primary steps of education.

Economic justice has been attended by so many thinkers. Among whom, John Rawls does have a seminal place. He can be counted in equalitarian tradition; however at the same time he is loyal to liberalism. The newness of his idea is in his intermingling individualism and equalitarianism. This paper is responsible to analyze and criticize the foundation of economic justice theory of John Rawls. In developing this paper, it is used of analytical- descriptive method along with justice theories as well as public sector economic theories.

Global society is characterized by its philosophical, ethical and religious disagreements. What are the implications of the doctrinal conflict for the understanding of a conception of human rights? In this paper, I briefly explain John Rawls’ conception of human rights, which is distinct from and narrower than his conception of justice (i.e., justice as fairness). Rawls conceives human rights as minimal, but necessary requirements of justice – although not sufficient from a liberal point of view –that can be satisfied by various political systems. Rawls argues that human rights are common to all peoples, since they are compatible with all reasonable political morality, including those of both “liberal” and “decent hierarchical” peoples. The central idea of Rawls’ account is that, a conception of human rights suitable for a pluralistic world must be independent from controversial philosophical, ethical or religious doctrines. Such a conception must serve as the object of an overlapping consensus among different ethical and religious traditions; each may offer the different lines of argument.

As one of the components of modernism, in theory and practice, liberalism draws from Protestantism and the movement of religious reform in the sixteenth century. It has become a social movement that advocates individual freedoms and liberation from the constraints of any political organization. In sum, two bases can be mentioned for liberalism: an individualistic basis and a socialist basis. Reflecting on these two principles of liberalism, it can be regarded as an intellectual tendency and politics, which includes general principles such as freedom of expression, separation of powers, free market economy, and so on. The theory of the liberal state was a political-economic theory and the constitutional government was one of the foundations for its establishment. Adam Smith played an important role in developing this theory. The most important principle of the liberal theory of the state is that the government has no preference and superiority over other institutions. In fact, state is a social institution among the other institutions and should not interfere in other institutions. With regard to liberal government, there are three different perspectives: the unnecessity of state, the minimum government, and the maximum government or welfare state. Today, each of these perspectives identify liberalism with the theory of the minimum state, but by looking at the most liberal countries, it is clear that government in influential in many parts.

Political rivalry as a peaceful strategy of shift of power in modern politics is an established fact. This concept in liberalism has been formulated on certain principles and grounds. The present article, while studying the principles and grounds of political rivalry in liberal democracy, tries to level criticism at them in order to challenge the political rivalry which emerge from these principles and grounds. Drawing upon an analytic-inferential method, the findings from the library data have come to this conclusion that as liberal democracy has degraded from the requisites of teleological reason into the carnal desires in its task of explaining rights and values, it carries with it certain consequences the most important of which in the realm of political rivalry is that the political rivalries are not regarded as dependent on the ápriori values and they are independent of the wills and desires of the individuals and this independency brings about evil consequences for liberal democracy. Key words liberalism, principles of democracy, liberal democracy, political rivalry. 'The Study and Criticism of Political Rivalry in Liberal Democracy :by Dāwūd Taqilū Political rivalry as a peaceful strategy of shift of power in modern politics is an established fact. This concept in liberalism has been formulated on certain principles and grounds. The present article, while studying the principles and grounds of political rivalry in liberal democracy, tries to level criticism at them in order to challenge the political rivalry which emerge from these principles and grounds. Drawing upon an analytic-inferential method, the findings from the library data have come to this conclusion that as liberal democracy has degraded from the requisites of teleological reason into the carnal desires in its task of explaining rights and values, it carries with it certain consequences the most important of which in the realm of political rivalry is that the political rivalries are not regarded as dependent on the ápriori values and they are independent of the wills and desires of the individuals and this independency brings about evil consequences for liberal democracy.

Given the view of Liberalism to the human being and the freedom as well as the extraordinary development of this thought in the world and its differences with the Islamic principles, it is necessary to criticize the foundations of this school of thought from the viewpoint of Islam in various fields. Using a documentary and descriptive-analytical method this research criticizes the foundations of this theory to clarify the challenges of this thought from the point of view of Islam. This research seeks to study the foundations of Liberalism specifically, though some researches have been done in critique of Liberalism in general.

The right of patients to make decisions about their medical care, based on informed consent rule and the principle of respect for autonomy rooted from philosophy of liberalism. Patients with capacity are responsible for decision-making, but in those lacking capacity, a surrogate decision maker is needed. This process consisted of three parts: choosing surrogate decision maker, how to make decision and its criteria, if they founded on the intellectual foundations of liberalism, will faced with the challenges, so, must be sought the its solution ways in other philosophical systems. This narrative research tries to analyze and criticize the process of surrogacy decision making based on theoretical essentials of liberalism, meanwhile descript epistemic sources of liberalism. In conclusion, although, medical ethics based on liberalism principles has been designed in a structured manner and can resolve some problems of ethical decisions in medicine, could be however faced with serious challenges.