فصلنامه روش شناسی علوم انسانی
پیاپی 71 (تابستان 1391)

"Velayee" theory of knowledge refers to one of the approaches accepted by advocates of religious knowledge in Academy of Islamic Sciences. This academy with a specific expression on the nature of religion and science discussed religious knowledge in a tripartite approach including methodology, sociology and ontology. In this view, religious knowledge means that divine sovereignty rules over all processes of knowledge creation at every level. Here, religious knowledge based on philosophy of becoming and methodology. The present study attempted to explain and analyze "Velayee" theory of knowledge. It seems that critiques of epistemology and theology and also those provided through west studies and science studies can be considered as some criticisms of this theory.

This paper is a critique of the "Critical Remarks on the two concepts of religious science and indigenous knowledge". The author of that paper, taking a Popperian stance, argues against the concept of religious Science. My paper shows that this view is not sufficient to negate the “religious Science”; because Popperian criticism does not make scientific theories –containing the metaphysical notions - free of metaphysical doctrine. The critics are organized on the Popper’s Second World; so, they, themselves, may be organized in the context of metaphysical doctrines. This paper concludes with a brief review of two scholars who defend the term “Religious Science” to argue that, at least in some areas, constructing any scientific theory without a clear standing on religious Worldview is not possible.

This article provides an appropriate ground for developing the Islamic human sciences in general and establishing a pattern for Islamic sociology especially. Given that, it deals with the most important methodological foundations of theory-building in the Islamic sociology concentrating on the field of sociology of the family. The article emphasizes the following pivotal suppositions: 1) The Islamic theory in the accepted pattern employs simultaneously and coherently Ijtihadi, rational and empirical methods. 2) It follows both current formations of sociological theories i.e. set of laws and causal process. 3) With respect to level of the theory, it would be a middle-range theory. 4) It mixes methodological individualism with methodological holism. 5) It employs a deductive strategy following a special textual pattern. 6) Among different kinds of models, it gives priority to constructing theoretical and normative models. 7) With regard to concept formation, it prefers an operationalistic approach. 8) It extracts hypotheses from the statements of religious texts in both mediate and immediate manners. 9) It meets the criteria of methodology of Ijtihad as well as the criteria of empirical confirmation or refutation of the hypothesis.

Due to its practical nature defining the role of values in methodology of management studies as a social sciences discipline is of particular importance. Thus, it seems that exploring different aspects of this problem faces Islamic management researchers with a new research direction. The findings of this study, which was performed in an analytical – descriptive method, showed that in the first step of research, values assist social sciences researchers in the identification of problem, establishment of related intellectual framework and prioritizing different aspects of study. Also, because of the practical nature of management and the fact that managers could not be devoid of values, this scientific discipline has been more influenced by values. Moreover, there is plenty of evidence that assert the importance of the role of values in management. Islamic values have been constructed in a systematic approach and hence, writer of this paper suggested that for strengthening their research capacity, Islamic management researchers should use these findings in order to provide the basis for emerging Islamic management theory in the light of a systematic study of values.

This paper argues methodology of analyzing institutions is more important than understanding the effectiveness of institutions in economic performance and tries to articulate a framework for institutional analysis. It is important to recognize the usual methodology which is employed by economist is suited to closed systemswhile in reality economic spheres are open, evolutionary, multi-layer and unpredictable systems. If we accept this ontological assumption, then we must employ a suitable methodology to make economic systems understandable. To do this, proposed methodology, recommends to begin economic inquiries from problems and to find answers from different layers of social reality and to unify acquired evident according to documented problem.

The aim of this paper is an inquiry in the problem of truth in economics. The subject of truth, interconnected with epistemology and methodology. So we consider methodology in an epistemological perspective. We start with, influence of change in twenty century’s philosophy of science on economic methodology. I believe that, economist hoped that, they can use these scientific methodologies, that based on Hypothetico -Deductive model, to became economic discipline more scientific and also, solve the problem of truth. But because, economics as a social science has a fundamental difference with natural science such as physics, economic methodologist, confront some problems. To overcoming thises problems, we must dismiss the distinction between “context of discovery” and “context of justification” in methodology of science. So, the origin of theories become important, and we can use a paradigmatic view and institutional approach in economic methodology, to solve the problem of truth.

In general, holism about A is the view that A is not independently individuated, but is individuated in a network of other objects belonging to a whole. In the philosophy of mind, holism is mainly adopted as to intentional states, not phenomenal statessuch as sensations. Here the problem is whether phenomenal states individuate independently or in relations with one another. First we will consider different versions of the problem based on its different aspects; does the holistic relation obtain between various phenomenal types or their tokens, between synchronic phenomenal states or diachronic ones, and is it a sort of individuation or covariation. Furthermore, is this relation necessary or contingent, and is it inclusive or is restricted to some phenomenal states. In the end, we will consider the argument from the “unity of consciousness” in favor of phenomenal holism.