در سال های اخیر، علم سنجی نقش مهمی در سنجش و ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهشی داشته است. این علم، رشد و تکامل پژوهش را در طول زمان با مراجعه به داده های استانداردشده پژوهش های دانشگاهی به ویژه اطلاعات کتاب شناختی، تجزیه وتحلیل می کند. در واقع، علم سنجی یا همان دانش سنجش علم با ارزیابی و رتبه بندی اصولی پژوهشگران، دانشگاه ها و مراکز پژوهشی به ارتقای آنها کمک کرده و منجر به شناخت بهتر نقاط قوت و ضعف آنها می شود و نقش مهمی در سیاستگذاری عمومی و حکمرانی علمی بر عهده دارد. در این میان، جدای از مبنامندی علم سنجی و به تبع آن، امکان بومی سازی علم سنجی که در جای خود جزو مباحث مناقشه برانگیز جامعه علمی به شمار می رود، اینکه آیا علم سنجی در همه علوم از مبانی و منطق واحدی تبعیت می کند و یا باید برای علم سنجی علوم انسانی به دنبال منطق متفاوتی بود، یکی از دغدغه مندی های اصحاب علوم انسانی محسوب می شود. این مقاله، با در نظر گرفتن مفهومی عام از فلسفه و مبانی علوم و با الهام از نظریه لاکلا و موفه، از روش توصیفی و تحلیلی استفاده نموده تا از این طریق ضمن توجیه علمی لزوم استقلال نسبی علم سنجی علوم انسانی از مطلق علم سنجی، امکان شکل گیری مکتب علم سنجی علوم انسانی را مورد بررسی قرار دهد. از آنجا که شکل گیری مکتب علم سنجی علوم انسانی نیازمند ارائه تصویری عملی از آن نیز می باشد، شش سئوال کاربردی نیز در این مقاله بر اساس روش تحقیق کیفی مطرح و پاسخ های اولیه ای به این پرسش ها ارائه شده است.

The prevalent conception of science and knowledge in Iran and Islamic countries is distinguished from the modern conception of science in the industrial world. Based on this, it is explained why Islamic countries still have not accepted the modern conception of science, along with common examples. This differentiation of conceptions of science helps us explain the conception of religious science or sciences clearly. With the differentiation of designated religious science and exclusive religious science it can be explained why designated religious science is desirable and exclusive religious science is undesirable.

The purpose of this paper is to examine two conceptions of knowledge: traditional and modern. One of the important discussions of traditionalism is to put emphasis on traditional sciences and their roles.These sciences have been neglected since the renaissance, especially in the modern world.Modern scciences have a significant role in the foundation of modern thoughts, so they are admired by modernists and are considered as the feature of the modern western civilization. Modern sciences based upon this modern scientific paradigm have got serious repercussions that cause serious criticism.Traditionalists, as one of the critics, believe that their most important flaws is their separation from traditional sciences while pointing out the differences between traditional and modern sciences.They acknowledge the sacred science based on the pivot of sanctity and realization through intuition and its respect towards truth. On the other hand, modrn sciences are separated from the sacred one and are based on profanity, rather than on intellect while its main aim is utilization rather than truth.

This paper studies the cultural change in science from academic science to post-academic science by the use of documentary studying and analytical reasoning. The aim of this study is determining the direction of cultural change in science and comparing it with cultural change in society. The knowledge production which surrounds academy has little relationship with the values of society and epistemological norms regulate scientists’ behavior from within the scientific system. But in post-academic science the relationship between science and society operates in the same line with market and government and science produce within the social context and scientists’ behavior controlled by the norms out of the scientific system. So the culture of science has changed because science applied to meet the requirements of market and industry. The result is that contrary to cultural change in society that goes from materialism to post-materialism, cultural change in science moves from post-materialism to materialism.

Before discussing the relationship between Islamic ethics and mysticism it must be exactly clarified that what we mean by ethics. Is that the one discussed in mystical works or that of the philosopher? A fact that is usually neglected in contemporary research. The ethics mentioned through mystical works is mostly based on Kitab (Quran) and Sunnah (tradition) and religious anthropology which both seek the same goal, closeness of man to God. On the other hand, ethics regardless of being a branch of science, deals with the moral values. Based on practical mysticism, man is required to be enriched with love, as a constituent of its general element. According to this description, the relation between ethics and mysticism as two branches of science is absolute commonness and differentiation. But the relationship between philosophical ethics and Islamic mysticism is a cased commonness and differentiation. Before Mulla Sadra, Islamic Philosophical ethics had its roots in Aristotelian anthropology that considered the essence of man unchangeable, claiming that every value is a state between two disvalues. So the essence of ethics was also a permanent fact not a dynamic one, being compatible with the mystical course of perfection. But Sadra’ s philosophical ethics is the just restricted form mysticism, being rooted in narration sources such as Quran and traditions.