ISLAMIC POLITICS RESEARCH
Year:2013 | Volume:1 | Issue:1|Papers Count:6

In recent years, localization of humanities has been greatly noticed in scientific and academic circles. This paper deals with the issue of localizing humanities by studying the basics of anthropology and since localization of humanities would be impossible without redefining anthropology and its principles the present paper explores this issue as an introduction to localizing humanities. The author’s view is that our educational system in humanities is mostly taken from the West which is based on an anthropology known as Humanism. This Western line of thought appeared after the Renaissance and is not consistent with our religious society. So the issue of localization of Humanities in Iran would not be possible without reviewing Western anthropological found ationsanddeviating from it. Because based on humanist thought, the definition of man in terms of biology is more consistent with Darwin's ideas, in terms of politics and society with the ideas of Hobbes and in terms of economy with liberalist and Marxist ideas.Therefore, this paper highlights Islamic anthropology as the groundwork for localizing humanities and explains its different dimensions on the basis of Islamic perception.

Interpretation is as old as mankind and has always helped the man to interpret the nature and the text both in ancient times and in the middle Ages. But hermeneutics as a method for scientific interpretation of the author or speaker’s intention is traced back to the recent centuries and especially to the Age of Enlightenment in the eighteenth century and since then it has become a remarkable and significant method in the study of phenomena in humanities. However, despite claims that the hermeneutic has tried to fill the gaps in scientific study by a non-empirical way, it has not succeeded to satisfy the need of humanities to discover the nature of events and analyze them. So this question arises that “why does validation of hermeneutic methodology in the Islamic sciences and humanities show its failure to analyze the phenomena in the fields of Islamic sciences and humanities?” It is believed that non-empirical hermeneutics has only experienced the Western empirical atmosphere and if it comes out of this atmosphere and notices religious understanding it can overcome its failures in the analysis of Islamic sciences.

The waves of Islamic awakening have always become longer and wider since two hundred years ago. The most important achievement of this historical movement is the bringing of Islamic rules from margin to the focal point and later, gradual restoration of confidence to the Muslim world. In order to make this goal operational with the rapid growth of Islamic awakening, many of today's autocratic puppet rulers of Muslim countries feel the loosening of the foundations of their governments. However, this process of waking and awakening is now facing several obstacles from its interior. Accordingly, the question raised in this articleis that "In Imam Khomeini’s view, what are the internal factors in habiting the Islamic awak eningin Muslim countries? “Our results show that in Imam Khomeini’s view, continuation of Islamic awak ening process in volves removing barriers and providing back ground f or the restoration of scientific and knowledge confidence and avoidings cattering and fanaticism. In this study, we examine the Islamic awakening in Imam Khomeini’s view using a pathological process and investigate the internal barriers of this political-social phenomenon.

This paper seeks to answer this question: “What is the position of justice and development in liberalism, socialism and Islam, and what is the relation between these two factors?” After the introduction, the contents are organized under these titles: First, the position of justice in the development models of liberalism (due to diversity of perceptions, in this paper, only Rawl’s and Hayek's views have been introduced on a comparative basis). Second, justice in socialism models (here, three forms of fictional, scientific and reformist socialism of the relationship between justice and development have been discussed on a comparative basis). Third, justice in Islam (as an example, Motahari perspective on development and its relation to justice has been studied).In the end, conclusion has been organized in the form of a comparison table based on seven factors of the discussed three schools about justice and development.

By presenting the theory of" the end of liberalism history", Francis Fukuyama (American-Japanese thinker) revived the issues of political philosophy of history again. He claimsthatliberal democracy is the last school and political system of the history. Fukuyama, based on Hegel’s theory interpreted by Alexander Kojeve, introduces "liberal democracy" as the end point of human ideological evolution, the final form of human government and the end of history.On the other hand, the twelve-Imam Shia has its own theory about the "Apocalypse" and unlike Fukuyama, introduces "pure Muhammad an Islam" and "Imam Mahdi’s government" as the last ideology and government of the history. Now, regarding these two theories and the soft war between Islam and Liberalism to win the future specially after the decline of the Soviet Union, this question arises that in comparing two theories of Shiite Apocalypse and Liberalism end of history, which one is better?Research method in this paper is "comparative study". Comparative studies commonly include three processes of description, comparison and conclusion. The author’s hypothesis in this study is superiority of Shiite-apocalypse theory. Therefore the rival hypothesis which prefers liberal democracy is rejected.

This paper seeks to answer this question: Which option, war or peace, does the religion of Islam consider as the "prior principle" in relationships of Muslims with other people?The authors use library method and re-read the verses and Hadiths about war and peace and also study the significant views of jurists and interpreters. In the end, they suggest a third view based on which we should differentiate between disbelievers and polytheists in general, and their governments. The two sides’ reasons are used to conclude that the principle governing the relations of Muslims with disbelievers and polytheists in general is "peace" and the principle governing the relations of Muslims with their governments is "war".