@article { author = {., .}, title = {.}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {3-8}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {تحول و تکون جامعه شناسى معرفت}, abstract_fa = {.}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_719.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_719_725b24849247fa60ecfb77ac72e49359.pdf} } @article { author = {., .}, title = {Components of Determinism in Marx's Epistemological Views.}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {9-26}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {The article is made up of two main discussions: In the first one, an outline of social determination of knowledge is given. Hence, three approaches are put forward on the relation of society with knowledge. They are later explained by the components of determination. The two models of determination components are also elaborated on. In the second discussion, Marx's epistemological views are in focus. They are (1) Marx,s philosophical approach to knowledge and (2) his social approach to knowledge. In the former, he gives precedence to object (matter) rather than to subject (mind); however, he does not move from ontology directly to epistemology, rather he enters in the realm of sociology. In his social approach, five basic issues are dealt with: (1) social being and awareness, (2) the base and superstructure, (3) the conflict of forces and the production relation, (4) the stratificational view, and (5) the ideology.                                       }, keywords = {}, title_fa = {مولفه های تعیین درارا معرفتی مارکس}, abstract_fa = {.}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_720.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_720_c5a3534b16289bc06730bd7ef897b957.pdf} } @article { author = {., .}, title = {On Max Scheler's Sociology of Knowledge}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {27-50}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {Max Scheler divides sociology in to cultural sociology wich studies the ideal factors and pure sociology which concens the study of real factors as well as the basics of human life. Scheler's aims in the sociology of knowledge are contrasting with the costant meaning of intellect, the discovery of the current of knowledge in history, outlining the real metaphysical thought, the effective factors of historical causation, and a generalizing outline of human knowledge. Scheler represents knowledge on two planes, hence believing in two kinds of world view: (a) a relatively natural world view, and (b) a relatively artificial world viewsHe calls the former group soul and the latter are mind.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {نگاهى به جامعه شناسى معرفت ماکس شلر}, abstract_fa = {.}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_721.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_721_3c7cf2398e17229ace83767d82a051c8.pdf} } @article { author = {., .}, title = {A Review of K.Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {51-63}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {In Mannheim's view, the task of sociology of knowledge is to analyse the knowledge-existence relation. Ideology plays a basic role; it is used in two senses: one partial and another one total. The partial sense of ideology pertains to a situation where the dominant group of a society try to preserve and keep up their interests, hence unconsiderate of the current issues. By contrast, in its total sense, one's Judgements effects the views of the other members. The total sense can be divided into two planes: specific and general. In the former, an individual never questions his own status, while he considers the others' views as stemming from merely social situations. In the broad sense of the term, one would regard everybody's views, including his own, ideologically analysable. The sociology of knowledge reveals to the structure of various disciplines with historical conditions of society. The critics of Mannheim regard this view as relativism, while to escape this criticism, he resorts to the notion of relationism. Another criticism is that though he spoke in denial of the absolute world, he coulde not prove his words sociologically. His view that the proponents of the absolute are always those who agree with the current order is not true, because absolutists can belong to both dominant and dominated groups; each capable of proving their views as absolute. The question of absolute and relative should first be answered philosophically, prior to be discussed in the sociology of knowledge.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {نقدى بر دیدگاه کارل مانهایم در جامعه شناسى معرفت}, abstract_fa = {          کارل مانهایم[1] در کتاب معروف خود ایدئولوژى و اتوپیا اصول جامعه شناسى معرفت را ارائه داده و مفاهیم مهم و شاخه هاى مختلف این رشته و همچنین روش بررسى عملى را در آن توضیح داده و روشن ساخته است. به عقیده مانهایم وظیفه جامعه شناسى معرفت و یا جامعه شناسى دانش عبارت است از تحلیل روابط میان جامعه و دانش. از طرفى این رشته در جستجوى معیارهایى است که توسط آنها بتوان این رابط را نشان داد و از طرف دیگر سعى مى کند طبیعت این ارتباط را روشن ساخته و آن را از دیدگاه نظرى مورد شرح و بسط قرار دهد.        البته در دیدگاه معرفتى کارل مانهایم مسائل و مشکلات نظرى و عملى نیز وجود دارد. در این مقاله مهمترین آراء مانهایم در زمینه جامعه شناسى معرفت خلاصه شده و مشکوک ترین جنبه هاى آن یعنى آراء وى در زمینه «نسبیت اندیشه» و «روشنفکران غیر وابسته» مورد نقد قرار گرفته اند.  }, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_722.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_722_c9a186b3e778c61b76e33637d56e1b82.pdf} } @article { author = {., .}, title = {Social Development of Knowledge from Mowlawi's Perspective}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {64-86}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {Mowlana Jalal al-Din of Balkh, known as Mowlawi, pays great attention to the mysteries of knowledge and its delicacies in his poetical work Mathnawi. Though sociology of knowledge in its present sense is a branch of modern sciences, such novel views are found out in his ideas as well. He regards thought as the existing condition of being, hence recognizes its pivotal role in all walks of human life. He therefore pays tribute to the role of thought in its social context and poses such discussions which evidence the effect of human social life on knowledge, thought, and culture. Among the significant issues he poses is the mission of the Prophets which he regards as of a perfect social value. He portraits them as doctors who are after curing the diseases of humanknowledge. Mowlana also rejects the idea of the relativity and/or plurality of realities, but, at the same time, he puts forward a solution for the socio-cultural relativity of knowledge by introducing the numerousness of outlooks on the world; he sees this as a cause for the variety of views.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {تطور اجتماعى معرفت از دیدگاه مولوى}, abstract_fa = {.}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_723.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_723_ef466d0cf9ba4272cdb5ab4d8e8b24ab.pdf} } @article { author = {., . and ., .}, title = {.}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {87-118}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {آیا اعتبار حقیقت، همان اعتبار جامعه است؟ بازسازى و نقد نظریات اولیه دیوید بلور}, abstract_fa = {برخلاف برى بارتر1 که در آثار اولیه خود عمدتاً آرا و اندیشه هاى جامعه شناسان، خصوصاً جامعه شناسان معرفت، را مورد و ارزیابى قرار مى داد دیوید بلور2، بنیانگذار و نظریه پرداز دیگر معرفت شناسى اجتماعى مکتب ادینبورا، توجه خود را عمدتاً معطوف به دو دسته از فیلسوفان کرده است: فیلسوفان تحلیل ـ زبانى و فیلسوفان علم. در بررسى و تحلیل دقیق آثار اولیه بلور، سه تعلق یا تعهد آشکار مى شود که در زنجیره همه اندیشه هاى او به طور منظم و مستمر حضور دارد. مهمترین این تعلقات، تلاشهاى مداوم و پیگیر بلور است تا رویکردى صرفاً جامعه شناختى به علوم طبیعى، و نیز به ریاضیات و منطق، اخذ و استنتاج کند. موضوع دوم که حائز اهمیت و دائماً مطرح است، اتکاى کلى و تمام و کمالى است که به علم و نهاد پر پیچ و خم آن دارد. بلور در مواقع ضرورى به تلویح و به تصریح از علم نیز دفاع مى کند. تعلق دیگرى که رویه دیگر علم گرایى بلور را تشکیل مى دهد، مخالفت وى با فلسفه، به طور کلى است، و با مکاتب فلسفى اى به طور اخص که نگرشى انتقاد آمیز نسبت به علم دارند. سومین تعلق بلور به مارکسیسم است که جلوه هاى مختلفى پیدا مى کند. این تعهد ضمنى شاید به طور طبیعى با مواضع ضد ما بعدالطبیعى وى پیوند خورده است. پیش از اینکه جنبه هاى مختلف پیدایش و تطور مکتب ادینبورا را مورد تحلیل دقیق فلسفى قرار دهیم، جا دارد نکته اى را که به لحاظ تاریخى اهمیت دارد گوشزد کنیم، و آن این که دیوید بلور نخستین بار، در سال 1973، صورت بندى بسیار مختصر و مفیدى از اصول مکتب ادینبورا رسماً اعلام مى کند، به گفته وى: «چهار شرط علیت3، بى طرفى4 ، خود اطلاقى5 و تقارن6 برنامه تمام عیار جامعه شناسى معرفت خوانده خواهد شد» (دیوید بلور، 1973/ الف: ص 174) در ادامه مقاله به طرح و ارزیابى سه موضع فوق در آثار بلور مى پردازیم.}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_724.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_724_480434d0034274de35e15c7cb3af0549.pdf} } @article { author = {porter, roy and ., .}, title = {.}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {119-131}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {نفوذ و حضور آراء و ارزشهاى ایدئولوژیک در علوم تجربى}, abstract_fa = {.}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_725.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_725_382db594f8ba820e122995735a22be65.pdf} } @article { author = {., .}, title = {.}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {132-143}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {رابطه معرفت و جامعه گذرى بر اندیشه هاى متفکران مسلمان}, abstract_fa = {..}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_726.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_726_2941d4de9ac4499db4962e6e5ad0fb93.pdf} } @article { author = {., .}, title = {.}, journal = {Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities}, volume = {3}, number = {11-12}, pages = {144-162}, year = {1997}, publisher = {Research Institute of Hawzah and University; (Hawzah wa Dāneshgāh Research Institute)}, issn = {1608-7070}, eissn = {2588-5774}, doi = {}, abstract = {.}, keywords = {}, title_fa = {معرفى محتوایى کتاب جامعه شناسى معرفت}, abstract_fa = {.}, keywords_fa = {}, url = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_727.html}, eprint = {https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_727_f12fc75e05518c795eea013002e82881.pdf} }