The focus of this study is primarily on “the discrepancy in mentality as an important factor affecting family problems and divorce”. For this purpose, some minor studies were conducted each of which experimentally examined different aspects of mental discrepancy in Iranian families. Almost all of these studies showed that permanent disputes and divorces resulted from the differences in their world-views, thinkings, and impressions in their mutual affairs. At last, the theory of Homogamy with two major revisions were used to explain the reasons and causes of family problems and divorce which were confirmed in minor studies and cases.

no abstract

The fast growing evolutions in our organizations and the organizations attempt to manage these changes efficiently reveals that in order to tackle these problems, which are threatening the existence of our organizations, and convert them into development chances we need to supply our organizations with knowledge and knowledge management. Having done this, it would be possible to pass through the labyrinth of current changes in today’s world and make our organizations grow in an efficient manner. In fact, knowledge is a tool which can convert natural and individual assets into wealth and direct us to progress and improvement. In this article, with the aid of a literature survey, the concept of knowledge and its types, knowledge management and its associated models as well as its goals and obstacles especially in governmental organizations are described. Afterwards, there is a conclusion on how to expedite this procedure and finally, the current situation in Police Organization is discussed via interviews and document studies. This approach has been followed several times in recent years and has led to a number of outcomes.

Scientific scepticism, fundamentally, questions the veracity and epistemic value of claims not supported by scientific evidence. Motivated by the assumption that only the empirical investigation of reality leads to the truth, the scientific sceptics often maintain that only scientific method is best suited for this purpose. Claims found to be wanting in scientific evidence are considered untrue, and of little or no epistemic consequence. Using the analytical and critical methods, this paper interrogates this epistemic criterion of justification of scientific scepticism. It shows the inherent epistemic deficits in this criterion of the scientific sceptics, and how absolutizing its demands in such a manner as to undermine the veracity and epistemic significance of claims outside the mainstream discipline of science is not only to entrap themselves in many epistemic burdens, but also to sink under the unsavoury weight of criteriological egocentrism, detrimental to cognitive progress. As a credible alternative, this paper explores the epistemic fecundity of contextualistic pluralism – the pluralism of contextually underwritten cognitive positions – in truth and knowledge justification. It concludes with the relevance of this approach in epistemic justification as evident in its inclusive nature as well as its shift of the focus of philosophical thinking from identity to diversity in an interculturality society.