There are two general views on the impact of technology on DEMOCRACY: a (technology is a threat to DEMOCRACY, b) technology provides proper grounds for DEMOCRACY.The aim of this article is to study the consequences of the influence of technology on DEMOCRACY. Taking technologistic and cultural approaches, this paper studies the influence of technology on the four components of DEMOCRACY as a government system- decision making policy, human beings as decision makers, community as consisting of individuals, and procedures of determining destiny-and argues that technology is an integral part of DEMOCRACY in modern TECHNOLOGICAL era to the extent that it entails making the new term as «TECHNOLOGICAL DEMOCRACY. This term overshadows the question of whether technology is a threat or opportunity to DEMOCRACY. The question would be significant, when its purpose is to reconcile DEMOCRACY and technology.

Purpose: The present study aims to identify and explain the futures of Iranian provinces in the competition for the development of NBIC TECHNOLOGICAL convergence (synergy between nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive sciences) with a focus on Yazd province. Method: This research, which has been conducted with a qualitative and descriptive approach, is classified as an exploratory futures-study. In this way, the relevant research records were first reviewed to compile a list of drivers in the development of convergent technologies. The list was then refined and prioritized to identify two key drivers, with the Delphi process attended by fourteen experts. By intersecting the uncertainties of these two drivers, four scenarios of the province's future in TECHNOLOGICAL convergence competition emerged. Findings: The two key drivers affecting the success of the province in the competition for convergent technologies are: the rate of development of the innovation ecosystem and the amount of financial resources allocated to this process. Based on this, four scenarios of the future situation of the province in this field were identified, which have been named as "Vanguard", "Buyer", "Remnant" and "Hired". Conclusion: In order for the provinces to be able to succeed in the forthcoming competitions in the production and operation of convergent technologies, it is necessary to plan for strengthening the ecosystem infrastructure from now; at the same time, it is necessary to make efficient efforts to provide sufficient financial resources for the research and commercialization of these technologies.

In This Essay Is Trying to Study The Relation Between Islam and DEMOCRACY In Model of Deep DEMOCRACY and Committed DEMOCRACY. Thus, I Study This Relation in on Seven Factors of Concepts of DEMOCRACY (Political or Philosophical), Awareness From outside, Multi Approach to DEMOCRACY, Community nd Self Interaction, Communication, Situated Self and Pluralism, That Are Beyond of Current Liberal DEMOCRACY in The West, and Criticize It. This Factors Are Basis of Deep DEMOCRACY. And, Because Committed DEMOCRACY Is Taking From Shariati, s Thought, Then This DEMOCRACY Relyed on Shariati, s Thought. Finally, Is Resulted That, Shariati, s Reading on Islam, in This Sight, Is Democratic.

Religious DEMOCRACY model possesses significant critical capacity in comparison to other theoretical patterns of political system. Inspired by the teachings of new critical theory and explaining critical capacity of the model of deliberative DEMOCRACY order as a product of new critical theory, the author explains theoretical proximity and coordination found between deliberative DEMOCRACY order and religious DEMOCRACY model. Then he argues for the critical capacity of religious DEMOCRACY and its higher capacity as compared to deliberative DEMOCRACY order. This paper is mainly intended to shed a light on the idea of necessity of religious DEMOCRACY for Muslim nations in the existing conditions of the Muslim World.

In recent modernity era, especially between big war and the annihilation of communism, the most important political division in democratic countries has been the duality of Right/Left. Often the two biggest rival parties, apart from their different names, have been representing two tendencies, the social DEMOCRACY and the liberal DEMOCRACY. The main difference between these two positions has been about functionality and ethicality of welfare state. Our question in this article is the following: From the point view of social and economic mechanism, the intersection of democratic countries is closer to system of preferences of social DEMOCRACY or liberal DEMOCRACY? It is to corroboration that, somewhat contrary to the twentieth century, a scientific-experimental and realistic approach to the social planning makes these two positions convergent in a pragmatist framework, and, despite of a propagandist atmosphere of challenge, their theoretical and ideological differences are leaving their seriousness and functionality. The conflict of Tax versus services is transferring from an ideological and ethical principle to a subject for a limited and temporary examination among a group of experts. The existence of welfare state is no more a problem, it is its ranges and limitations which is a subject of discussion and decision. Even the domain of disagreement here is to reduce.

The deconstructionist philosophy is a good example to show how systematic philosophy corresponds with DEMOCRACY. Through criticizing egocentrism and enmity to others, deconstructionism is after relating the philosophical principles with the principle of acceptance of others and DEMOCRACY. On the other hand Derrida' s discussion of socio-political DEMOCRACY like DEMOCRACY of the future and the challenges DEMOCRACY faces, also have its roots in his philosophical thinking. So DEMOCRACY and deconstructionism are two sides of the same coin and it is not possible to understand one without understanding the other. This is a strong relation and Derrida's idea about philosophy and politics is based on it. The DEMOCRACY of future as the result of this relation is the mirror of Derridean philosophy and politics. The relation between philosophy and deconstructionist DEMOCRACY and their interaction and effects on each other are among the main concerns of this paper.

The subject of ‘DEMOCRACY’ with its capacity to conform to the national customs in Islamic societies has had the precedence of familiarity of Muslims with Plato’s and Aristotle’s opinions since a very ling time ago. In the contemporary period too, the Shiites looking into ‘DEMOCRACY’ for indicating its relation and its proportion to the Mahdist government has attracted the attention of many thinkers to the issue.The theory of ‘DEMOCRACY’ was designed and introduced almost 3000 years ago as a political thought which spread everywhere. But due to its wide sense and ambiguity of meaning its principles and bases have all made it difficult for many people to find the relation between DEMOCRACY and the doctrine of Mahdism.Now, this article has dealt with the role of people in a government called “Mahdist Government”.It Has tried to clarify any compatibilities or incompatibilities between DEMOCRACY and Mahdism to remove apprehension. The sacred movement of Mahdism will be an overwhelming global revolution to mobilize everyone to swear allegiance and promise loyalty with Imam Mahdi (PBuH).This government will function by using its special mechanisms to stabilize a universal policy.