Abstract
One of the main debates in the field of humanistic epistemology is the agent-structure debate, which is naturally the same in the theoretical field of international relations. In this field of study, based on the approaches toward agent or structure, views are divided into three types; structuralism, ...
Read More
One of the main debates in the field of humanistic epistemology is the agent-structure debate, which is naturally the same in the theoretical field of international relations. In this field of study, based on the approaches toward agent or structure, views are divided into three types; structuralism, agent centered and hybrid. Now if we want to theorize a local theory on the basis of Islamic view, naturally it's needed to specify Islam's approach toward this debate. The purpose of the author of this article is the view of the creators of the discourse of the Islamic Revolution, especially Imam Khomeini, on this issue, and secondly, to explain this type of view in the field of theory making on international relations. In this regard, the works and views of the main researchers in this field are reviewed and criticized and it is explained that despite the main view of these works that have seen the Islamic view as hybrid, in the view of Imam Khomeini and the discourse of the Islamic Revolution, while considering and accepting the existence of Structural constraints, agent-centricity, and human will are paramount.
jalal dorakhshah; Eshagh Soltani
Abstract
In this essay, I have tried to make a comparative comparison of Shahid Motahari's and Isaiah Berlin's views on freedom with an analytical approach and by adopting a modified McCalm's definition of freedom as a theoretical framework and looked at how these concepts were constructed differently. Accordingly, ...
Read More
In this essay, I have tried to make a comparative comparison of Shahid Motahari's and Isaiah Berlin's views on freedom with an analytical approach and by adopting a modified McCalm's definition of freedom as a theoretical framework and looked at how these concepts were constructed differently. Accordingly, under the component of "human actor", he compares the anthropological issues of two thinkers; The aims and ends of each of these two thinkers of freedom were compared. In Berlin's view, since man is an indeterminate being and must determine himself; freedom is not an instrumental value and is itself an end. Freedom is the most important value because it is used to realize its incomplete, incomplete and indeterminate aspects at will. But in Martyr Motahari's view, since man is a natural being who has a definite nature and therefore has definite ends, freedom is validated so that one can step in the path of his / her development. That is, freedom is a means by which one can only attain his or her ultimate goals.
