Modern (theoretical) physics seems to be in deep crisis today as many of its core aspects are not empirically well-confirmed. Heated exchanges among physicists on the scientific status of physical theories with little or, at best, a tenuous connection to possible experimental tests is highly visible in the popular scientific literature. Some physicists (e.g., Carroll 2014, 2019; Ijjas et al., 2017) argue that science must discard empirical testability as one of its defining properties and the highly explanatory theories of present-day physics should be exempted from experimental testing, while others (e.g., Ellis & Silk 2014) spot in these arguments (for softening the testability or falsifiability requirement for modern physics) a dangerous tendency to undermine science. The philosopher of science who naturally draws most attention in these current debates is Karl Popper (1902-1994). His views, however, are often misrepresented in these debates. The prime objective of this paper is to explain how a more enlightened perspective on the ongoing debates can be obtained by a careful scrutiny of the Popperian criterion of falsifiability. As a first step in achieving this objective we will analyze the two major (conceptual) failures on which the current controversies rest. Our next step will be examining the controversial string theory to see whether the criteria of falsifiability is a ‘blunt instrument’ for determining its scientific status.

This paper is aims to review the book entitled Review of History: What and Why? byBeverley Southgate. Our findings show that this book is not an original work which contains speculations of the author, but it is an elementary text book about one of the most important questions of the philosophy of history, i. e. Does history have any kind of objectivity? In a good manner, he gathered views of the former as well as the latter. Also, he shows that how the history, as a disciplines affected by other fields of humanities. Its language is simple and has a logical structure. But relativistic and subjectivist approach of the author is one of the challenging aspects of this book in Iranian philosophical atmosphere. This book is old and its subject matters are very limited.

Ancient Iranians are among the nations well aware of the therapeutic effects of herbs, and hence pharmacology, even though no written scientific text is left giving witness to this. However, in mythical as well as ancient stories, one can find traces of the familiarity of ancient people with medicine and treatment. However, after the emergence of Islam (6 A. D. ), numerous textbooks on the pharmacy science (pharmaceutical science) are available. These texts, along with other historical and literary texts, encompass traces testifying the existence of such traditional pharmacies. Such pharmacies were in practice till mid-19th century when the first medical school was launched. At this time, mainly due to the familiarity of Naseredin Shah, (the King), with medical improvement in Europe, the first modern medical school was established in Iran. A French doctor, Dr. Focckette, as the first pharmacy teacher, started working in this school. This was followed by the effort made by Albert Scheverin, a Dutchman, to found the first modern pharmacy in Tehran, in 1882, providing people with chemical medicine. The present study aimed at giving a report on the history of medicine and pharmacy in Iran, followed by the reports of the first modern pharmacies founded in Iran.

The study of Kermanshah's first modern schools foundation can be an introduction to the process of the modern cultural evolutions and modern civil institutes and also it can be an entrance to the history of the west of country's cultural evolutions. The establishment of the modern schools in kermanshah in Mozafareddin Shah period (1899-1906) is the topic of this article This article analyzes the foundation of the first scholar units using documented evidence, and books with descriptive-analytical approach which exists in the cultural history of the western Iran and it also tries to clarify the structral obstacles existing in the modern scholar units In this period, despite its special importance in the history of the culture and modern schools of Kermanshah, due to the lack of historical and statistical evidence, destruction of documents and information, lack of statistical questionaires, and poor local historiographical thoughts, historical documents were either destroyed in the storm of historical events or they are too little to present an exact judgment on its quality.

The aim of this essay is to discourse the end of history in philosophical-religious perspective. The great philosophers discuss the route of history and its end in their own philosophical views.The philosophy of history and its origin is derived from the past 25 century, however the subject of this article is to elaborate the end of history from Oswald Spengler, Karl Jaspers, Arnold Goseph Toynbee, P.A. Sorokin, Francis Fuyukama and Samual Huntington.Each of mentioned above name has his own historical view which will be examined in the essay.

Long after the creation of the first Persian novels and short stories, research works were created in connection with these works of fiction. In this study, the method of historiography of the first history of fiction (ie “, The History and Evolution of Modern Iranian Literature and The Founders of Modern Persian Prose”, ) that have been published abroad at the same time has been investigated. In this article, with a descriptive-analytical approach and based on the components that the authors of this research have considered for the type of literary history, the discourse of these two works has been studied. The results show that Alavi and Kamshad studied literary works without being influenced by the ideology of the government of the time and with the aim of finding two-way links between literature and current political events. Of course, they have their drawbacks,structural weaknesses in the arrangement of materials, not addressing the literary style of works and not analyzing the literary and artistic aspects of literary works, using second-and third-degree sources, basing on selections of previous critical works are among these weaknesses, often due to distance from institutional contexts and contexts are related to literary works, which has caused significant damage to these two histories of literature.