One of the most pivotal topics discussed implicitly and explicitly by Allame Ja’fari in the majority of his works is ethical CONSCIENCE. From his viewpoint, the reference of the concept of ethical CONSCIENCE include the inner voice, compass of human existence, and guidance toward the ideals. In defense of the existence of ethical CONSCIENCE, he believes that this power is existed among all people and to his viewpoint, the operation of this power is the complement of the rational method. According to Allameh, the functions of ethical CONSCIENCE can include some factors such as human personality growth, humanistic safe guidance, and cases such as blaming and torturing human. His research in ethical CONSCIENCE is a unique attempt; nevertheless, his viewpoint is addressed by some criticisms among which we can refer to the effect of social-ethical regulations on ethical CONSCIENCE, considering independency of the power of ethical CONSCIENCE from other powers, and existence of different ideals among the people and societies. In addition, Allameh’s major attempts were more on the concept of ethical CONSCIENCE and less on examples of ethical CONSCIENCE.

One may say that The Open Society and Its Enemies (OS) offered in 1945 the first complete elaboration of the general approach proposed by Karl Popper, namely his ‘critical rationalism’, a bold generalization of the fallibilist falsificationism in the domain of the empirical sciences masterly proposed in Logik der Forschung (1934). The political content of The OS has been critically discussed. Nevertheless, not all people insist on the equally important moral dimension of the book, giving it its unity, I submit. Without morality, no critical discussion, no REASON, no open society, let us say in a nutshell. I would argue that according to Popper, a strictly Christian morality of love would not be the appropriate emotional companion of critical rationalism, but that the less demanding moral emotion of sympathy or compassion is perhaps necessary to give it its force against violence. I give some support to this line of argument. In my view, Popper proposed a somewhat unarticulated critical rationalist ‘emotivism’ of sorts. The emotion of compassion is necessary for triggering our moral decisions and values, which are the ultimate basis of the choice for a REASON against violence.

Throughout all of Rousseau’s works there is tension between REASON and CONSCIENCE. REASON binds men when they think correctly, but divides them when they place it at the service of self-interest. Conversely, the universality of CONSCIENCE is immediate and transparent: it transmits the truth of the existence of God and of the universal principles that underlie human action, despite the differences of particular legislations. Mankind possesses an innate and intuitive CONSCIENCE of the fundamental principles by which its conduct must be inspired. Were we to consider human actions only according to the criterion of physical need, of causality, and of movement, vices and virtues would disappear, and terms like morality and honesty would have no meaning. But each one of us perceives from within that this is not the case. We feel that moral good and evil are more real than anything else, without any need whatsoever to prove it. To obey the CONSCIENCE one has of good and evil without human mediation means to reject the dogmatic formalism of religions, as well as the vanity of philosophical disputes. Every human being, however, is situated in a national community. What should the state’s attitude be vis-à-vis religion? Rousseau indicates two paths. The first consists in establishing a purely civil religion that admits only those dogmas that are truly useful to society. Rousseau highlights the contradiction of a Christian religion that, although it is the religion of peace par excellence, fuels continuing bloody clashes among men due to a dogmatic theology that is totally alien to the essence of the Gospel and extremely hazardous for the life of the state. The second path consists in allowing Christianity to retain its authentic spirit, its freedom from any material constraint, without any obligations other than those of individual CONSCIENCE. The Christian religion cannot but benefit the state, as long as one does not make it part of the constitution.

Relying on the observation that language – “langage” or logos – has a questioning essence and its existence depends on the “problematological difference”, Michel Meyer proposes the couple “question/answer” as the basic unity of linguistic studies. His analysis of the contrastive blend of these two elements leads to some problematological triangle with hermeneutic/semantic, rhetoric/ argumentative and dialectic/dialogic as sides, and which includes any speech act, i. e. any kind of interaction between question and answer, in both intra- and intersubjective areas. Between this triangle and what Meyer calls the “classic model of syntax/semantics/pragmatics”, there is no side by side opposition, especially since the semantic dimension is common in both models. However, Meyer insists on their division, because he considers the classic model as the very manifestation of “propostionalism” in language sciences. In the problematological conception of language, the critique of linguistic propostionalism and the one of philosophical propositionalism are melded. They join the critique of positivism which, says Meyer, is the radical form of propostionalism.

Background: The values such as morality, CONSCIENCE, liability and responsibility act as catalyst in changing a new idea and thought into a product and its presentation to the market, and they cause the entrepreneurship process become shorter and more effective. On the other hand, these values will attract the confidence of entrepreneurs aiming at future sight and implementing new ideas. In interaction with economical and cultural factors of entrepreneurship, the above values may lead to the ultimate level of confidence of the entrepreneurs that is their sacrifice; as a result, the economical and cultural development of the society is unavoidable. The fair distribution of income, growth of investment and all economical and social factors will be indirectly subject to these values.Conclusion: Introducing moral aspects and job CONSCIENCE and defining the concept of entrepreneurship, has been tried to illuminate the role of these values in this area.

The concept of CONSCIENCE has had a special place in the development of the history of Western cultures. This position can be considered both in the general culture of these societies and in terms of the effects, it has had on the concept of modern ‘natural law’. The importance of this concept can be seen in the philosophies of ancient Greece to the centrality that is given to it in contemporary intellectual discourse. CONSCIENCE is a major topic in Western philosophy, but it also has an important place in literature; it has been considered a key concept in modern law. In this tradition, the CONSCIENCE has been a moment of individual development, a moment of disobedience to norm, and a moment of creativity and imagination. In the modern Kurdish culture, this and similar concepts are weakened their traditional cultural and social status. However, this forgetfulness is also seen in the world of Kurdish intellectuals. Ahmad Mukhtar Jaf’s novelette, The Question of CONSCIENCE, by taking into consideration the standards of «the history of ideas», is one of those precious opportunities that can be considered from several perspectives. The years of writing this book are valuable testimony to the intellectual and cultural changes that the Kurdish community has undergone. However, this story expresses a different perspective on how CONSCIENCE must be understood. Ahmad Mokhtar attempts to demonstrate how CONSCIENCE needs a suitable social context for growth, and how in the absence of such a context, CONSCIENCE may be forgotten.

Modernity theories occupy a vast scope in the literature, representing philosophical, historical-civil, sociological-historical approaches, and sociology of religion. Various analytical methods and theories with specific titles and characteristics have been developed within any of these approaches. The present research started with the assumption that all these approaches in this wide-ranging spectrum revolve around action and reaction concepts on one hand, and self-founded and communicative REASON on the other. By using this framework, the above-mentioned notions can be conceptualized and differentiated as the main focus of this study. Our research hypothesis states that modernity theories began with the self-founded and autonomic action and then were extended to communicative REASON and interaction. It follows that, the theorists’ who attempted to explain the essence of modernity moved from philosophy to sociology in form of a process by which the society was rationalized while conceptualizing REASON made a passage through transcendental to instrumental and then to communicative REASON. The focus of this research is on the exploration of this path by the use of a historical-hermeneutical approach.

Is there any domain beyond REASON that is paradoxical and the oppositeof REASON?This question always makes mysticism face philosophy. Therefore the two domains of REASON and beyond REASON and the relation between them have been always attended to by the Gnostics and students of gnosis and religion in both the Christian West and Islamic East. W.T. Stace maintained that the judgments of the domain of REASON are paradoxical, interpreting a phrase of Meister Eckhart.Mulla Sadra has offered an interesting thesis in this field interpreting Aynolgozat and Ghazalis words. This thesis reveals minute details that have been ignored. In this paper we have used comparative method to show the depth of his view.

Challenge of the mystic with philosopher is one form of opposition to philosophy. Philosophy is attacked throughout history through three regions of religious dogmatists, anti-religious emperisists, and devoted mystics with different intentions. Among most fascinating discussions in the history of human thought is the dispute between thought and intuition, REASON and love, and knowledge and insight. Mystics are pessimistic of power of REASON in the perception of problems of metaphysics and anti-rationality is observed in works of their majority. In such works, REASON is put in opposition to three affairs: heart, love, and perplexity. Intellectuality and recommending impotence and perplexity is the central element of disagreement between mysticism and philosophy. Mystic is enamored of perplexity but philosopher is anti-perplexity. Perplexity primarily seems to be in contradiction to such categories as knowledge, guidance, faith, and belief. the nature of perplexity and expounding its proportion to the said catego.ries is the main object of this research.

The Phrase “CONSCIENCE of Humanity” has been used in some international instruments. This phrase, with its own special meaning, is intended to fill the legal gaps in international law and has worked as a criterion for assessing the rules of the international legal system. Thereby humanitarian developments in international law, is understandable. The focus of this research is the applications of the concept of "CONSCIENCE of humanity" in international instruments in its semantic representation with the purpose of finding the place of the above mentioned concept within the sources of international law.