In spite of strong background of discussion around good society, most of scholars working on this subject finally have fallen into either reductionism or unrealism traps. Regarding this point, Current research is an effort to design and test theoretical model for ideal society respectively via analytical theories and empirical data. The model that is based on Parson's AGIL theory, and Giddense's structuration theory, contains four dimensions- economic, political, social and cultural and two interrelated - micro and structural levels. According to framework, good society is a society that not only enjoys from development an all four dimensions and two levels, but also sets a balance between these dimensions and levels. The empirical part of research that is kind of validity test for the model, is based on variety of resources. Results showed that among five countries -Finland, Slovakia, Turkey, China and Iran, Finland is the closest one to this ideal model.

In this paper, the writer examines the character of Mard`as, father of Zapp`ak, and admires his piety and humanity. The specific question the paper addresses is whether piety and humanity are the characteristics of Mardas, or are they, in fact, the old characteristics of Zappak, the three-headed dragon, which conforms to the Rig Veda. To do so, the writer first takes a glance at the mythical characteristics of the Sahnameh, and then explains the transformations made to render the mythical themes more rational.

The first and clearest meaning of moral impartiality is "impartial benevolence," in the sense of giving equal weight to every single person in every single decision. This kind of impartiality requires rejecting partiality toward certain people; partiality favors certain people and their interests to some extent over others. The aim of this article, given its limited space, is to discuss only one circumscribed aspect of the impartiality/partiality problem in morality. I will critique impartial benevolence, an important view about moral impartiality, and put forward certain features of partiality as a foundation for criticizing impartial benevolence. According to impartial benevolence, if the benefits that you can give others by dedicating your money, time, and/or energy to them are slightly more than the benefits that you lose thereby, then you ought to continue to do that because acting upon relational characteristics is not only ‘irrational’ but also ‘immoral’. But both these arguments for impartial benevolence are refutable. First, there is also rational partiality. Second, impartial benevolence is not supported by ethical universalizability. Third, principles of partiality can be endorsed in impartial evaluation. Further, impartial benevolence is not only impracticable but also severs morality from human flourishing.

The question of “what is happiness?” is among the most important questions of Greek philosophy. In those early works of Plato that very likely represent the views of Socrates, Socrates mainly focuses on moral issues and tries to get close to an explanation of the nature of virtue (or virtues), the happy life and the relation between virtue (or virtues) and the realization of happiness (Eudemonia). Given the Principle of Eudemonism, in this paper it is tried to examine Socrates’ views on the relation between virtue and happiness and defend what is known as the “Principle of the Sovereignty of Virtue”.

In this article, we attempt to examine the concept and importance of good deeds from the perspective of Imam Ali (AS), relying on his sermons, letters, and aphorisms in the valuable book Nahj al-balagha. We will discuss the effects of good deeds and the obstacles to performing them. In Nahj al-balagha, Imam Ali (AS) refers to good deeds with words such as kindness, benevolence, righteousness, goodness, and also emphasizes the importance of action and piety. From Imam Ali's perspective, piety and avoiding humiliation and contempt, eradicating evil, conquering hearts, are among the positive effects of good deeds. On the other hand, stinginess, withholding rewards, and not rewarding the righteous are considered obstacles to performing good deeds.

Many researches in recent years show specific effects of different variables on good governance practices. In some, the researchers have shown the great impact of e-governance on good governance and vice versa. This research aims to find the underlying relations among egovernance on good governance. This paper can be categorized to descriptive (based on the nature), library study (based on the data gathering method), fundamental theoretical research (based on objective). This paper uses a quantitative research method by utilizing Kalman Filter as a data mining (prediction) tool. The results obtained from current trend analysis has showed that there is a strong relations between e-governance and good governance proportionally. Scenario-based analysis also figured out that the change in good governance level on the egovernance has more impact than the change in e-governance level on the good governance.

Background: Many researches in recent years show specific effects of different variables on good governance practices. In some, the researchers have shown the great impact of e-governance on good governance and vice versa.Objective: This research aims to find the underlying relations among e-governance on good governance.Research Method: This paper can be categorized to descriptive (based on the nature), library study (based on the data gathering method), fundamental theoretical research (based on objective). This paper uses a quantitative research method by utilizing Kalman Filter as a data mining (prediction) tool.Findings: The results obtained from current trend analysis has showed that there is a strong relations between e-governance and good governance proportionally. Scenario-based analysis also figured out that the change in good governance level on the e-governance has more impact than the change in e-governance level on the good governance.

Explaining the criterion and the basis of the good and evil deeds is one of the fundamental subjects that – prior to the Muslim philosophers- in Ionia, the Greek philosophers have brought up. They had concluded that Reason is the only criterion for the distinction of such deeds, and had considered it as a backup for the eternal moral principles. But, after the emergence of Islam, the Muslim philosophers used the Reason, first for the recognition of God acts and then, for the measurement and recognition of the human deeds. In this article, Mowlavi's viewpoint will be explained with the references to the opinions of the theologians. Considering the way that Molawi has defined justice, and his admiration of reason, one could find similarities between Molawi and the rationalists, especially Matoridiyyeh. Molawi accepts things' goodness and badness. However, he thinks of God's affairs as being relative, and therefore considers religion as assistance for Reason.Molawi, sometimes, has related the deeds' vice and virtue to their results and has considered the criterion of goodness and badness as being dependable on the emergence of their influence in the human's conscience. Therefore, in Mowlavi's viewpoint, the criterion of good and bad deeds is both rational and necessary.

"wellbeing", "happiness" and "autonomy" are each in different approaches as the end of man in general, and the end of each political action in particular is introduced and knowledge of them is considered the end of political philosophy. But the form of the relationship between these three concepts, their association or contrast with each other is still questionable. The understanding of these concepts, and its contribution to the quality of benevolence, is still debated. This article seeks to first understand the nature of (individual) autonomy and then examine what it has to do with good life and happiness. The main claim of the article is that autonomy is one of the ultimate values for good life and is placed next to happiness and not under happiness. In addition, it will be argued that although happiness does not necessarily and conceptually require a significant level of autonomy, we do necessarily need a level of it for " wellbeing. " Therefore, autonomy can be considered as one of the ultimate ends of human beings and below wellbeing. Our method in this research will be the method of philosophical reasoning in the way of critical thinking.