پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاهروش شناسی علوم انسانی1608-70702911720231222Human as Method in the Thought of Anthony Giddensانسان بهمثابه روش در اندیشه آنتونی گیدنز117215810.30471/mssh.2024.9896.2519FAهادی موسویاستادیار، فلسفه علوم انسانی، پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه، قم، ایرانJournal Article20240114Human as an ideal and human as a creature living in the current state of any society are two debatable dignity in social sciences and humanities. This initial separation of these two aspects of human being can make us more familiar with the identity of social sciences and humanities. Thoughts that have produced a multitude of theories, terms and vocabulary in economics, sociology and other fields of science. Anthony Giddens is one of the thinkers who considered these two dignity in his social studies, and therefore, studying his works can show us how to distinguish between the methodological knowledge of human and the human knowledge as a fact. In the first stage, he conceptualizes human based on the theoretical requirements of late modernity, and in another stage, he applies this formulation to the study of human in the recent modern period which he call in late modernity. A person whose personality is summed up in the body and therefore the management of the body is considered as a matter of human agency; Where morality and religion have lost their place as matters of identity, and even the possibility of death entering to shape the personality as the reality of the human world is kept away from the eyes as an obstacle on the way to crush the human and human identity in the late modernity.<br />The method of this article is based on the review and analysis of those methodological works of Anthony Giddens, in which man is manifested in a theoretical and methodological form. In such a way, when we talk about the role of consciousness, the limits of consciousness, the existence or non-existence of consciousness in the theories of structuralism, functionalism or other theories, it is actually where we see the reflection of human and human consciousness in social sciences. When we talk about structures and the extent of their influence on the behavior and consciousness of the agent, we have actually talked about the forced effects of the environment on human behavior and will. Therefore, in both cases, we have been looking for manifestations of the reflection of the human image in the theories. This method is actually a method to discover the methodological dignity of human beings in the formation of different social science approaches. When these methodological elements of Giddens' view were extracted, an attempt was made to reopen the second part of social science studies that pay attention to human identification, and that is focusing on a person who lived, grew, and his personality was formed in a certain time-space period. He has finally left the world. This second part of human studies is possible based on that theoretical part. And in fact, the theoretical part acts as a method and a model to identify the actual human being. The theory of structuration in Gidden's thought acts as the part of the method of human knowledge, and the knowledge of modern human personality is actually the application of the method in the identification of human reality. Therefore, we see the manifestations of human knowledge in both theoretical and real areas in Giddens' works.<br />With this definition, the issues that arise for modern man are all part of the second part of human knowledge in social sciences. These issues include the existential questions that arise for humans and are answered or silenced in a social way. The problem of the body as the human self, which in the modern period displays a manifestation of one's personality in front of others. The issue of anxiety and basic trust, which is considered the basis of modern personality. In this case, the management of the body becomes more important than the management of the soul because the essence of the identity of people is manifested in their bodies. Therefore, body management can be considered as being the agent. In this case, another issue for modern man is the issue of ethics. Because according to the institutions that Giddens enumerates for the modern world, which include capitalism, militarism, surveillance and industrialism, ethics does not find a special place in this world. These institutions change everything based on their requirements and leave nothing fixed for human life, and ethics is one of these things. Therefore, one of the elements that is crushed under the gears of the modern world is morality. The term lifestyle also emerges from this; where human is faced with different patterns of modern life and many choices are in front of him and he is forced to choose between them. If there is only one model in front of man, it is no longer possible to talk about lifestyle.<br />Finally, modern human reaches a zero point where everything ends. And that point is nothing but death. With this definition, the memory of death is an uncontrollable danger for the modern personality, which cannot be controlled and managed, and on the other hand, it cannot be approached in order to gain an experience of facing it and develop the personality beyond it. It is necessary to hide death as much as possible from everyone's view and normalize it in a way that is kept away from our eyes. The end of the modern personality occurs at this real point in life; A reality that modernity does not want people to face; Because the unreality of the fundamental existential security and the fundamental trust desired by modernity is revealed.<br />Human knowledge in social sciences is not only a content and data, but the main part of human knowledge in social sciences is the methodological knowledge of human beings; Where the main theories and concepts of humanities and social sciences are formed through it. In this regard, Giddens has identified two types of human knowledge in social sciences. In the first type, the ideal man in the world of modernity is studied in a theoretical way that forms the system of concepts of Giddens's structuration theory and in this case the social theory is formed, but in the second type, Giddens uses this theory of human being to explain the human in the modern world.انسان بهعنوان امر ایدئال و انسان بهعنوان موجودی که در وضعیت فعلی هر جامعهای در حال گذران زندگی است، دو حیثیت قابلبحث در علوم انسانی و اجتماعی هستند. این تفکیک اولیه از این دو حیث از انسان میتواند ما را در مواجهه با هویتی تحت عنوان علوم اجتماعی و علوم انسانی بیشتر آشنا کند. افکاری که انبوهی از نظریهها و اصطلاحات و واژگان را در اقتصاد، جامعهشناسی و دیگر رشتههای علوم تولید کردهاند. آنتونی گیدنز از جمله اندیشمندانی است که این دو حیثیت را در مطالعات اجتماعی خود در نظر گرفته و ازاینرو مطالعه آثار او میتواند به ما نشان دهد که چگونه میان شناخت روششناختی انسان با شناخت انسانی که واقع شده است تمایز بنهیم. او انسان را در مرحله اول براساس اقتضائات نظری مدرنیته متأخر صورتبندی مفهومی میکند و در مرحلهای دیگر این صورتبندی را برای مطالعه انسان در دوره اخیر مدرن بهکار میگیرد. انسانی که شخصیت او در بدن خلاصه میشود و بنابراین، مدیریت بدن بهمنزله امری بهعنوان عاملیت انسانی تلقی میشود؛ جایی که اخلاق و دین بهعنوان امور هویتبخش، جای خود را از دست داده و حتی امکانی برای ورود مرگ برای شکلدهی شخصیت بهعنوان واقعیت جهان انسان از چشمها دور نگه داشته میشود تا مانعی بر سر راه خرد کردن انسان و هویت انسانی در دوره مدرن اخیر نباشد.https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_2158_025cf1aeda956b31265baee0553db065.pdfپژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاهروش شناسی علوم انسانی1608-70702911720231222Quantum Holistic Phenomenological Approach; a New Perspective to the Institution and Institutional Changesرویکرد پدیدارگرایانه کوانتمی؛ نگاهی نو به مسئله نهادها و تغییرات نهادی1933214410.30471/mssh.2024.9617.2475FAمحمدتقی گیلک حکیم آبادیاستاد، اقتصاد نظری، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران0000-0003-4128-9421ابوذر مرادیدانشجوی دکتری، اقتصاد، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران و
استادیار، گروه فیزیک، دانشکده علوم پایه، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران0000-0003-0989-4234زهرا کریمی موغاریدانشیار، اقتصاد نظری، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایرانJournal Article20230903The purpose of this article is to redefine the concept of institution and introduce the idea of transition duration in the process of institutional changes. One of the key features of the transition duration is the uncertainty it brings, leading to the unpredictability in individual's behavior for each other. The concept of uncertainty and its implications were first introduced in economic literature by John Maynard Keynes, who attributed its origin to the “animal spirit” of man. In order to understand the reasons for the existence of the transition duration in institutional changes and its impact on policy-making, it is crucial to rethink the concept of uncertainty. However, in this research, the source of uncertainty is seen as intentional actions of human. In the 20th century, by accepting the Causal Closure of Classical Physics (CCCP), social science has evaded to study and discuss the first-person intentional actions and their effects on social phenomena. Practically, studying the effects of first-person intentional actions on economic and social phenomena requires departing from the CCCP. On the other hand, in recent years, the quantum decision-making theory has emerged, which suggests that individual's behavior follows the laws of quantum physics. If human behavior follows the basic laws of quantum physics, then by applying idealistic interpretations of quantum theory, one can redefine the individual's decision-making system in such a way to include the role of intentional actions and the influence of the experimental background in decision-making system. Therefore, this study is purely theoretical in nature. The main presuppositions on which the arguments are based are: 1) Man is a social but utilitarian being who uses cost-benefit analysis in decision- making . 2) The model of a person's decisions and their cost-benefit analysis has a quantum nature and does not follow the rules of classical physics.<br />Applying the idealist interpretation of the quantum theory, the present study intends to introduce a novel conceptual framework titled "The Quantum Holistic Phenomenological Approach" to analyze the nature of institutions and institutional changes based on its relationship with the first-person intentional actions, which stem from a quantum cost-benefit model. Based on this, first, a quantum model of the person's decision-making process has been introduced, in which the person's cognition is represented as a the quantum wave function, and their intention as the cause of collapse, and their experience as a process of wave function collapse. This definition highlights two important features: Firstly, the impact of the individual's intentional actions and the experimental context on an individual’s decision-making process are taken into account. Secondly, a person's decisions are optimal from his(her) own point of view at that moment. But because of the dependence of the decision-making process on the intention of the individual and the experimental background, his(her) behavior has inherent uncertainty and is unpredictable for others. According to the nature of individual decision-making in the quantum model, which is accompanied by inherent uncertainty, institutions are the result of the intentional actions of individuals sharing information with each other based on a cost-benefit model in a given empirical context. This is done to reduce the uncertainty of individual decisions for Others and enable social coexistence. Also due to the dependency of the institutions on their practical base of formation, imitating the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in the quantum realm, experiences are categorized into two groups consistent and inconsistent. The consistent experiences are those with no external effects, which do not change the people's mental states and their information-sharing approach with others. Acceptation of the path dependency on the institution and some of their stability in our proposed model is due to the absence of the external effects of the consistent experiences. The inconsistent experiences are those with external effects, yielding changes in the information-sharing schemes between people. New and innovative experiences are considered inconsistent experiences because there is no record of them in the mind to share with others. From the perspective of the our theoretical approach, the institutional changes are stemmed from the external effects of pervasive inconsistent experiences that change the pattern of sharing information between people and as a result lead to disruption of the former institutions.<br />The most important findings and achievements of the introduced theoretical framework compared to the new institutionalism are; the assumption of bounded rationality is rejected so that the foundation of the ubiquitous character of uncertainty in the world is not the individual's imperfect perception of reality, but it is the other's failure, as the third person, to find out individual's optimal choices. Institutions are established according to the intended individual's calculation of the cost-benefit, who decides to share how much of the information in their mind with others and to reduce his/her individuality to lowering the intrinsic uncertainty of their optimal decisions for others, making social coexistence possible. The institutions' function depends on their practical base of formation and individual's intention, especially the political leaders. The reason of institutional changes is the external effects of pervasive inconsistent experiences. Due to the external effects of those experiences, the former institutions become soft and do not work properly. Formation of the new institutions following the novel situation requires that the transition duration passes by. Governments need to engage directly in the rent distribution to form and stabilize the new institutions to reduce the time needed for the transition duration.<br />According to new institutionalists, the best institutions for leaving societies out of the trap of underdevelopment are those that restrict the intentional actions of political leaders in distributing rent. In fact this argument is based on the assumption that individuals have an imperfect understanding of external reality. In such a world, what can lead to the gradual correction of the error of people's choices in conditions of uncertainty is the learning caused by competition in conditions of scarcity. However, the proposed " Quantum Holistic Phenomenological Approach" in this study reject the assumption of imperfect understanding of reality by individuals. Our theoretical approach suggests a new perspective on institutional changes, which aligns with the findings of the last two decades of studies about rent distribution on the development process of countries. In fact due to the political, social and economic consequences of the transition duration, intentional actions of political leaders in the distribution of rent is inevitable. Unlike the new institutionalists, our proposed theoretical framework does not make a general judgment about the limits and boundaries of these intentional actions or the most efficient form of institutions. The optimality of leaders' intentional actions in allocating resources depends on the political, social and economic conditions in which institutions are formed, as well as the ideology of political leaders and the structure of the natural endowments of that society. Therefore, the focus should be on discussing the quality of these intentional actions, rather than limiting them.در این مقاله با بهکارگیری تفاسیر ایدهآلگرا از نظریه کوانتم، چارچوب مفهومی جدیدی تحت عنوان «رویکرد پدیدارگرایانه کوانتمی» برای تحلیل ماهیت نهادها و تغییرات نهادی معرفی شده است. دستاوردهای چارچوب نظری ما در مقایسه با نهادگرایان جدید عبارتاند از: فرض عقلانیت ناقص رد میشود؛ بهطوریکه شالوده عدماطمینان فراگیر در جهان، پیشبینیناپذیربودن انتخابهای بهینه فرد برای افراد دیگر در مقام سوم شخص است. ایجاد نهادها محصول هزینه - فایده کردن فرد قصدمند است که تصمیم میگیرد برای کاستن از عدمقطعیت ذاتی تصمیمات بهینه خود برای دیگران به چه میزان اطلاعات ذخیرهشده در ذهن خود را با دیگران به اشتراک بگذارد و از فردیت خود بکاهد تا زیست اجتماعی با دیگران امکانپذیر شود. براساس اصل عدمقطعیت هایزنبرگ نشان داده شد که منشأ تغییرات نهادی تجربیات ناسازگار با آثار خارجی فراگیر هستند؛ بهطوریکه باوجود وابستگی به مسیر نهادها، تغییرات آن تدریجی نیست؛ بلکه در یک دوره گذار صورت میپذیرد. بهدلیل آثار خارجی، تجربیات ناسازگار قواعد بازی سابق مختل شده و نهادهای جدید، قوام و استحکام لازم را ندارند. کوتاه شدن دوره گذار درگرو مداخله مستقیم دولتها در توزیع رانت جهت قوامبخشی به قواعد بازی جدید است.https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_2144_f3443b16e0c2d9350e2448174bf14823.pdfپژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاهروش شناسی علوم انسانی1608-70702911720231222Hermeneutics of Modernity and philosophy of Human sciencesمناسبات هرمنوتیک تجدد و فلسفه علومانسانی در آرای رضا داوری اردکانی3548218110.30471/mssh.2024.9974.2525FAمالک شجاعی جشوقانیاستادیار، مطالعات میان فرهنگی معاصر، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، ایرانJournal Article20240214Reza Davari Ardakani (1933-) during more than five decades of active presence in contemporary philosophy and humanities of Iran, has tried to understand, analyze and pathologize the experience of contemporary Iran in the face of modernity and philosophy and humanities related to it. to pay Dr. Davari's reading of the relationship between modernity, philosophy and humanities has a lot of convergence with continental and post-positivist philosophy in the philosophy of humanities. This article aims to take a hermeneutic approach (with an emphasis on Diltay's hermeneutics) and by analyzing the texts published by Dr. Davari to discuss the relationship between philosophy and modernity and humanities in his opinion. In his various works, Davari considers "modernity" to be the complete expansion of Western history. Western history is the history of metaphysics that has dominated Western thought for two thousand five hundred years since the time of Plato. The seedlings of modernity grew in this land in the 15th and 16th centuries, and philosophy from the time of Francis Bacon to the contemporary period has been the expression of "hermeneutics of modernity". This article, relying on the hermeneutic tradition in continental philosophy of humanities (with emphasis on Deltay), aims to show that there is a close historical-conceptual relationship between Dr. Davari's understanding of modernity and the foundation of humanities. Modernity is the "lived experience" of the social-historical world of modern European man, which has found its conceptual formulation in philosophy and modern humanities since the Renaissance. Expressing the components of Dr. Davari's philosophical cognitive science in accordance with the lived experience of contemporary Iran, which has become the "state of modernity" is another step of this article. The modern state of modernity, which formulates the humanities according to itself, has its roots in the lived experience of the modernization of contemporary Iran (and in the interpretation of the judgment, inverted modernity). Rereading the experience of modernity and the science related to it in contemporary Iran, emphasizing the concept of the wisdom of development in the context of post-revolutionary Iranian experience and the relationship between religion and human sciences at epistemological, institutional and discursive levels in the intellectual experience of late judgment shows that the philosophical encounter with science What difficulties does a human being face in contemporary Iran? Contrary to the view of the positivist and analytical philosophy of the defender of science in the West, the "post-positivist" philosophy of humanities and social sciences pioneered by Deltay's hermeneutics and more seriously in the second half of the 20th century and beyond A different texture and context has been formed. Here, there is no news of the absolute authority of the new experimental science, and the post-positivist developments in philosophy and human sciences - mainly in the studies of science, from falsificationism to sociological, historical, cultural and feminist approaches to science - are the previous authority of the discourse. has challenged positivism in science. Here we are faced with a range of approaches; From critical realism to Cohen's paradigm theory and Feyerabend's epistemic anarchism on the one hand and sociological studies of science in the Edinburgh school, and poststructuralism, postmodernism and hermeneutic arguments, with all the diversity that can be found in it.<br />From the time of writing the book The Current State of Thought in Iran (1979) to the publication of the book The Course of Modernity and New Science in Iran (2021), Dr. Davari has always thought about the philosophical foundations of science, although since the mid-seventies and with the publication of the book About Science and its Acceptance In the position of the head of the Academy of Sciences, most of the deliberations of the jury are focused on science and humanities and development. In his philosophical scientology, while criticizing the views of positivist and neo-positivist philosophers such as Popper, he sympathizes with the continental philosophers of science such as hermeneutics and phenomenologists (Dilthey, Weber, Husserl, Heidegger and Gadamer) and in some positions agrees with the views of Thomas Cohen in history. Science has also referred.<br />In analyzing the relationship between modernity and humanities, Dr. Davari is inclined to a certain point of view: that humanities and social sciences emerged with modernity and in the history of modernity and have defended, supported and protected modernity. Even Marxist sociology - and not the politics of Marxists - has done nothing but protect modernity and cure its crises. Now that laxity has entered the pillars of modernity and modernity has entered an uncertain and futureless period, one can question the dignity and status of humanities.<br />Arbiter's confrontation with the discussion of religion and humanities and humanities-Islamic sciences has become more critical in the nineties, but in a way, in his earlier works in the late fifties and early sixties, this kind of critical confrontation is also present, albeit briefly and implicitly. had. We don't intend to go into this discussion in detail here, but it should be pointed out that judging modernity and its relations with human sciences, the possibility of designing human sciences based on non-humanist foundations (humanism according to the narrative of new philosophy after the Renaissance) considers it difficult, if not forbidden<br />The tradition of hermeneutics, according to Diltay, provides the possibility of formulating alternative humanities in relation to the European-oriented humanities by emphasizing the central role of historical/cultural lived experiences. Humanities for the West and the modern world is like theology for the Middle Ages and the Islamic world, and if it is to be - and this is if it is tied to historical lived experiences and not ideological and political decisions - a world order other than the Western order is established. There is no need for existing humanities. This is the position of the arbitration unit from the 1950s to the end of the 1990s. He does not consider the new philosophy as the cause and founder of modernity and human sciences, and modernity (-modernity-the West) in Dr. Davari's view is the history of the accumulated lived experience that took place in Europe after the Renaissance and from the 18th century and with a credit of five hundred or two It has been realized fifteen hundred years ago. The key point in the hermeneutic understanding of judging modernity is that the modern living world is built with people who have the wisdom and understanding of Bacon, Descartes and Kant, not that they all have read the philosophical books of this philosopher, but they have the understanding that Descartes and Kant "found", "described" and showed it.<br />Humanities have systematized modernity. If there is disunity and disorganization in the West and in the developed world, these should not be compared with the distress of the underdeveloped world. The distress of the non-modern world is the distress before the order of modernity, and the disorganization of the developed world is the disorganization after the modern order and the effects of the end of modernity, and the ratio of these two is not the same as human sciences.رضا داوری اردکانی (1312-) در طول بیش از پنج دهه حضور فعال در فلسفه و علومانسانی معاصر ایران کوشیده است تا به فهم و تحلیل و آسیبشناسی تجربه ایران معاصر در مواجهه با تجدد (مدرنیته) و فلسفه و علومانسانی همبسته با آن بپردازد. خوانش دکتر داوری از مناسبات تجدد، فلسفه و علومانسانی، همگرایی زیادی با جریانهای فلسفه قارهای و پُست پوزیتیویستی (post−positivistic) در فلسفه علومانسانی دارد. این نوشتار بر آن است تا با اتخاذ رویکرد هرمنوتیکی (با تأکید بر هرمنوتیک دیلتای) و با تحلیل متون منتشرشده از دکتر داوری بهصورتبندی مناسبات فلسفه و تجدد و علومانسانی در آرای وی بپردازد. داوری در آثار مختلف خود، «تجدد» را بسط تام و تمام تاریخِ غربی میداند. تاریخ غربی، همان تاریخ متافیزیک است که از زمانه افلاطون تاکنون دو هزار و پانصد سال بر اندیشه غربی سیطره دارد. نهال تجدد در قرن پانزدهم و شانزدهم دراین زمین رشد یافت و فلسفه از زمان فرانسیس بیکن تا دورۀ معاصر بیان «هرمنوتیک تجدد» بوده است. این مقاله با اتکا به سنت هرمنوتیکی در فلسفه علومانسانی قارهای (با تأکید بر دیلتای) درصدد نشان دادن این معناست که میان فهم دکتر داوری از تجدد با طرح بنیادهای علومانسانی، نوعی ارتباط وثیق تاریخی – مفهومی وجود دارد. تجدد «تجربه زیسته» جهان تاریخی− اجتماعی انسان مدرن اروپایی است که در فلسفه و علومانسانی مدرن از رنسانس به بعد صورتبندی مفهومی خود را یافته است. بیان مؤلفههای علم شناختی فلسفی دکتر داوری متناسب با تجربه زیسته ایران معاصر که از آن به «وضع تجددمآبی» شده گام دیگر این مقاله است. وضع تجددمآبی که علومانسانی متناسب با خود را صورتبندی میکند، ریشه در تجربه زیسته مدرنیزاسیون ایران معاصر (و به تعبیر داوری، تجدد وارونه) دارد. بازخوانی تجربه تجدد و علم همبسته با آن در ایران معاصر با تأکید بر مفهوم خرد توسعه در بستر تجربه ایران پساانقلابی و مناسبات دین و علومانسانی در سطوح معرفتی، نهادی و گفتمانی در تجربه فکریِ داوریِ متأخّر نشان میدهد که مواجهه فلسفی با علومانسانی در ایران معاصر چه دشواریهایی پیش رو دارد.https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_2181_7174e3df512c8c9a9971890dc7d92923.pdfپژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاهروش شناسی علوم انسانی1608-70702911720231222Meta-method of evaluating behavioral biases in financingفراروشِ ارزیابی اریبهای رفتاری در تأمین مالی4976216310.30471/mssh.2024.9611.2472FAراحله دبیریدانشجوی دکتری اقتصاد، اقتصاد، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران0009-0004-0522-5003محمد واعظ برزانیدانشیار، اقتصاد، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان0000-0001-6351-2060سعید صمدیدانشیار، اقتصاد، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهانJournal Article20230829Introduction and objectives<br />The way of financing is also effective on other issues such as profit, efficiency and expansion of production. Managers have an effective role in this field, they usually have their own styles when making decisions about financing and are not completely rational (Bertrand and Schoar, 2003). Research shows that managerial traits such as behavioral biases are important factors for capital structure decisions (Hackbarth, 2008). In most of the conducted researches, the existence of behavioral bias in managers has been confirmed. On the one hand, bias in decisions related to financing causes non-optimality and wastage of financial resources, and on the other hand, the issue of financing in Iran has deficiencies such as disproportionate distribution of risk, lack of proper monitoring system, lack of connection between real and credit sectors of the economy and the existence of unused capacities are faced (Mousavi, 2016). Therefore, investigating the behavioral biases of managers under the field of financing in Iran is important to control and reduce these biases. According to the growing trend of behavioral financial studies in the last decade, it is necessary to conduct researches with a forward-looking approach for the growth and guidance of future researches in order to identify the gaps and neglected points in the researches. The purpose of this study is to analyze the methods of evaluating behavioral biases, especially in research related to financing methods. This article deals with the analysis and criticism of the methodology of the researches done in this field in the form of meta method. meta method is used in selected studies by using the analysis of statistical methods and monitoring methods of bias evaluation. Considering that so far, no research has been done in the field of pathology of behavioral bias evaluation methods, especially researches related to financing methods; The results of this research can be used by researchers for future studies.<br />Method<br />This research is developmental in terms of its purpose, and since it examines the methodology of studies in the field of evaluating behavioral biases, it is of the content analysis type. To collect data, library study and document review were used. The statistical population of the present research is domestic and foreign articles in the field of behavioral finance, behavioral biases in financing methods, and evaluation of behavioral biases. The research method in this study is meta method. In the present research, according to the purpose of the research, the analysis of statistical methods, the monitoring of methods for evaluating biases in selected studies have been used. Considering that the purpose of this research is to investigate the methods of evaluating behavioral biases in research related to financing methods, keywords such as behavioral finance, evaluation of behavioral biases, and financing methods are used to select articles. After searching in reliable domestic and foreign databases, and after studying the researches, articles related to the subject of the research were collected. To investigate the methods of evaluating behavioral biases, more than 200 articles have been studied, of which 33 related articles have been selected because some articles have used similar methods. Due to the lack of a single method in the field of meta method, in this research, an innovative framework is used in the area of meta method. In this way, researches are reviewed in two parts. In the first part, the statistical methods for evaluating behavioral biases in selected researches are reviewed, and in this way, the available methods for evaluating each bias are presented separately. In the second part, the monitoring of the number of repetitions of the use of bias assessment methods in the researches is discussed. In this part, for two methods of statistical data analysis, i.e., descriptive statistics and inferential statistics in general and the subsections of this Two methods, i.e., descriptive indices, graphs and tables for descriptive statistics and parametric and non-parametric methods for inferential statistics, the number of evaluation methods are given.<br />Findings<br />In order to find different methods of evaluating behavioral biases in researches related to financing methods, selected studies were reviewed and methods of measuring that bias were obtained for each bias separately. In these studies, both descriptive statistics and inferential statistics have been used to evaluate biases. Among the 20 behavioral biases, the overconfidence bias was tested more than the other biases, and then the anchoring bias was tested. The biases of conformism, innovation and illusion of control have the least number of evaluations in these studies. To analyze the data in the selected studies, two methods of descriptive statistics and inferential statistics have been used; But the inferential method has been noticeably used to evaluate behavioral biases in research related to financing methods; Inferential statistics were used in 30 studies, but descriptive statistics were used in 14 studies. It should be noted that among the numerous studies, 33 related studies have been examined, some of which have used both descriptive statistics and inferential statistics in their research. In the selected studies to evaluate the biases in terms of time dimension, in the studies of the first researchers in this field, such as Kahneman and Tversky, the descriptive statistics method has been used more to evaluate and prove the existence of behavioral biases. In subsequent studies, especially in the last decade, more inferential statistics have been used in this field.<br />Discussion and Conclusions<br />Paying attention to the results of the research, research problems and gaps are observed in this field. For example, some biases such as compatibilism bias have been neglected, and it is suggested that biases should be investigated more comprehensively in future. It was also observed that studies in this field have mostly used descriptive methods or the regression family, which indicates the low variety of statistical analysis methods in this field. Therefore, researchers need to use other up-to-date analytical methods. Reasons for these research gaps can be mentioned: deficiency in the teaching of research methods in universities, the reluctance of researchers to choose uncommon methods in research, and the procedure of journals to accept articles. It is recommended that research centers, universities and scientific and research journals provide grounds for solving these problems so that researches can benefit from more richness.تصمیمهای مربوط به روشهای تأمین مالی میتواند تحتتأثیر اریبهای رفتاری مدیران بنگاهها قرار گیرد. اریبهای رفتاری موجب تصمیمگیری غیرعقلایی مدیران شده و انتخاب روش تأمین مالی بهینه را با مشکل روبهرو میکند. شناخت و ارزیابی اریبها، گام مهمی جهت بهبود تصمیمگیری است. باتوجهبه اهمیت این موضوع، مقاله حاضر با استفاده از فراروش به تحلیل روشهای ارزیابی اریبهای رفتاری در مطالعات مرتبط با روشهای تأمین مالی میپردازد. ازنظر موضوع و روش تحقیق در خارج و داخل ایران، این پژوهش دارای نوآوری بوده و بهعنوان نخستین مطالعه دراینباره، میتواند زمینهساز پژوهشهای بعدی باشد. برای انتخاب مقالات، کلیدواژههای مرتبط در پایگاههای معتبر داخلی و خارجی جستجو و پس از مطالعه، مقالات مرتبط با موضوع پژوهش گردآوری شدند. سپس از میان بیش از 200 مطالعه، تعداد 33 مقاله انتخاب شد. ابتدا روشهای آماری برای ارزیابی اریبهای رفتاری در پژوهشهای منتخب شناسایی و تحلیل شده است. سپس به پایش تعداد تکرار استفاده از روشهای ارزیابی اریبها در پژوهشهای موردنظر پرداخته شده است. نتایج پژوهش نشاندهنده تنوع کم روشهای تحلیل آماری درزمینهٔ ارزیابی اریبهای رفتاری در تأمین مالی است. همچنین، استفاده بیشتر از روش آمار توصیفی در پژوهشهای منتخب شناسایی شده است.https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_2163_e6761608db69d6364ca7f7ddb1626a4a.pdfپژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاهروش شناسی علوم انسانی1608-70702911720231222Classical Foundationalism and the Justification Structure of Historical Knowledgeمبناگرایی کلاسیک و ساختار توجیه دانش تاریخی7795215910.30471/mssh.2024.9693.2492FAسعید موسوی سیانیاستادیار، گروه تاریخ، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایرانJournal Article20231014Introduction and Objectives: The role of historical studies in regulating social interaction and constructing the discursive order of societies makes it necessary to question the validity of historical knowledge and has led the thinkers to evaluate the logic of historical thinking in the light of epistemological criteria. "Classical foundationalism " is one of these epistemological criteria prescribed by a group of Western thinkers and contemporary Muslim philosophers to validate epistemic domains. According to the classical foundationalist reading of the "standard definition of knowledge", the justification of epistemic claims requires access to infallible basic beliefs and deductive inference of non-basic beliefs from basic beliefs. Thus it sets out strict conditions which, althought is suitable for fields such as theology and mathematics, but its prescription to other epistemic fields will have no consequences other than skepticism in history and ineffectiveness of the most important means of each society in understanding its historical tradition and identity. Because tradition is a historical phenomenon that is remembered through historical evidence, and it is revealed to us by the work of the historian. In these circumstances, the application of strict criteria of classical foundationalism in evaluating the historical knowledge led us to discredit the most important source for understanding our historical identity. With regard to these considerations, the central problem of the paper is to evaluate the " justification structure of historical knowledge" in the light of "classical foundationalism" and seeks to prove that the "logic of historical thought" cannot satisfy the strict conditions of classical foundationalism.<br />Method: In order to demonstrate this claim, the author first draws the classical foundationalist description of epistemic justification. Because any validation of historical knowledge requires an evaluation of the practice of the historian in the light of epistemological criteria. Then he compares this description of epistemological justification with his understanding of the logic of historical thinking, which can be called "minimal reading of the construction theory of history." According to this reading, history is not a passive attempt by historians to discover past events and represent historical facts in the mirror of the mind, Because historical facts are known not in a transparent mirror, but in the light of the conceptual frameworks and perspectives of historians. Thus historical reality is never understood directly, but it is constructed through linguistic categories and in the light of the rusty mirror taken from the prejudices and value judgments of historians. With these considerations, we evaluate historical knowledge on two levels. At the first level, the limitations of classical foundationalism in justifying historical facts are recognized. At the second level, we also analyzed the limitations of classical foundationalism in justifying historical explanations.<br />Results: The application of this method leads us to the conclusion that classical foundationalism is not a correct understanding of epistemic justification in history. Therefore, it is appropriate to draw the structure of justification in each field of knowledge based on the abilities of that field of knowledge. To put it more clearly, classical foundationalism denies the inferential justification of all epistemological claims and believes that some beliefs are justified Nondoxistically and by referring to infallible sources such as introspection and rational intuitions. Thus, classical foundationalism considers our belief system to consist of two categories of basic beliefs and non-basic beliefs. Non-basic beliefs are justified by infallible inference from basic beliefs. On the other hand, basic beliefs are justified without inference from other beliefs and with a kind of direct and infallible access to the object. if we evaluate the process of knowing historical reality by historians in the light of this interpretation of epistemological justification, we come to the conclusion that the nature of historical thinking does not allow direct and infallible access to historical events. Because the historian's justification for choosing some events and ignoring other events is not based on infallible sources of knowledge, but based on the needs of society and common sense. As the reference of historians to the testimony of witnesses of historical events is not justified through infallible sources such as introspection and rational intuitions, it is justified through the Triangulation of the testimonies. Historians also recognize the objective meaning of written evidence by referring to their lived experiences and linguistic intuitions. In the field of historical explanation, if we evaluate the mechanism of the understanding model and the covering law model, we led to the conclusion that the justification of historians does not follow the principles of classical foundationalism. Because in the understanding model, the explanation of the historical event requires the recognition of the intention, motive, method and evaluation of the agent from the historical context. It is obvious that these action components are part of the inner state of historical agents and historians do not have direct access to them. In fact, historians' understanding of the inner state is not based on basic and infallible beliefs. Also, in the covering law model, the historical event is explained through deductive reasoning and the entry explanandum under universal hypotheses and initial conditions. It is obvious that if the hypotheses include people in the past, present and future, then it is difficult to verify its truth. On the other hand, verifying the truth of the initial conditions requires the infallibility of the witness's testimony and memory.<br />Discussion and Conclusions: Therefore, classical foundationalism is not a suitable theory for drawing the justification structure of historical knowledge. The lack of direct access to human actions in the past, the subjectivity of historical evidence, the inability to objectively understand historical sources and the justification of historical statements by referring to fallible sources such as testimony and memory are the reasons that do not allow the historian to use infallible basic statements to justify historical facts. On the other hand, the inadequacy of historians' attempts to overcome the problem of other minds, as well as the inability of historians to justify the infallibility of universal hypotheses are the reasons that do not allow access to infallible basic beliefs in the field of historical explanation. According to these considerations, classical foundationalism cannot be accepted as a theory of justification in historical studies. Therefore, we should avoid from imposing the criteria of other epistemic fields on history studies and to define the epistemic justification in history by referring to the possibilities and limitations of the historian's practice.نقش مطالعات تاریخی در تنظیم مناسبات اجتماعی و برساخت نظم گفتمانی جوامع، پرسش از مبانی اعتبار دانش تاریخی را ضروری و اندیشهوران را به ارزیابیِ منطقِ تفکرِ تاریخی در پرتو ضوابط معرفتشناسانه رهنمون کرده است. «مبناگرایی کلاسیک» یکی از این ضوابط معرفتشناسانه است که گروهی از اندیشمندان غربی و فیلسوفان مسلمان معاصر جهت اعتبارسنجی حوزههای معرفتی تجویز مینمایند. مبناگرایی کلاسیک با این ادعا که توجیه هر ادعای معرفتی مستلزم دسترسی به باورهای پایه خطاناپذیر و استنتاج قیاسی باورهای غیرپایه از باورهای پایه است، شروط سختگیرانهای را تجویز میکند که دانش تاریخی توان برآورده کردن آن را ندارد. عدمدسترسی مستقیم مورخ به کنشهای انسانی در گذشته، آمیختگی شواهد تاریخی با ذهنیت مورخان، دشواری فهم عینی شواهد مکتوب و توجیه گزارههای تاریخی با ارجاع به منابع خطاپذیری همچون گواهی و حافظه موانعی است که اجازه تولید گزارههای پایه خطاناپذیر در ساحت بازشناسی واقعیتهای تاریخی را نمیدهد. ازسویدیگر، نابسندگی تلاشهای مورخان برای گذر از مسئله اذهان دیگر و همچنین، ناتوانی آنها در توجیه خطاناپذیری فرضیههای جهانشمول موانعی است که اجازه تولید باورهای پایه خطاناپذیر در ساحت تبیین تاریخی را نمیدهد. با استناد به این دلایل است که نگارنده مبناگرایی کلاسیک را نظریه مناسبی برای ترسیم ساختار توجیه دانش تاریخی نمیانگارد و بر آن است که ساختار توجیه دانش تاریخی را باید براساس ظرفیتهای مطالعات تاریخی ترسیم نمود.https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_2159_9fbf5559f425d84d7a2cb857a0452d8a.pdfپژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاهروش شناسی علوم انسانی1608-70702911720231222A Historical Analysis of Half a Century of Efforts to Organize Research in Iranتحلیلی تاریخی بر نیمسده تلاش برای ساماندهی پژوهش در ایران97118216510.30471/mssh.2024.9832.2511FAکیوان الستیاستادیار، مطالعات نظری علم، فناوری و نوآوری، مرکز تحقیقات سیاست علمی کشور، تهران، ایران0000-0001-9915-7283Journal Article20231209Introduction and Objectives<br />It has been more than half a century (since 1967 and at the time of forming the Ministry of Science and Higher Education) that Iranian planners of science and higher education have been trying to organize research in a way that plays a more effective role in the process of social and economic development. But it was a goal that was not realized so far.<br />Research organizing will not necessarily be created by supporting a group of researchers. It requires an institution with two symmetrical tasks: Research, (On the one hand) is carried out within scientific communities and based on interactions and relationships between scientists, and (on the other hand) it requires systematic communication with priority issues (and so government and industrial clients).<br />Therefore, an autonomous institutional mechanism is required to mediate between research agents (i.e., universities and research institutes) and financial resources (such as government or industry funding). It is the mechanism that internationally has been realized through different structures, including the so-called "research councils". Although it is difficult to categorize the existing international samples (and other similar ones), one can perhaps refer to UKRI, or German Max Planck, and DFG Institute(s) and French CNRS, and so on.<br />In this article, by theoretical reasoning and historical confirming, it is explained how an incomplete conception of the structure of research councils (and the dominance of that incomplete conception) has caused only one aspect of the duties (i.e. supporting relevant research) to be given important, and the other aspect (i.e., protecting institutional autonomy) to be neglected and how efforts made to organize research have failed as a result of such circumstances.<br />Method<br />The results were obtained through documentary research and a theoretical and historical analysis. The scope of the research included the review of all available relevant documents in printed, handwritten, or audio form (as well as the remaining official documents from the institutions in question).<br />The analysis includes an idiographic approach to the issue of research in Iran. In the idiographic study, based on a fixed valuable idea, (historical) events will be sifted. In the current study, "research organizing" is assumed as a central idea, and so the historical events also are selected by a principle of selection related to the central idea. For example, in the research, establishing the Iranian Ministry of Science, Research and Technology is interpreted as an unsuccessful experience in shaping a research organizing institution, although the actual Ministry may have different successes or failures. Sifting events based on a fixed valuable idea is sometimes known as a "rational reconstruction" of events. A feature of the present approach is to make it possible to evaluate historical events. For example, in the current research, it will be possible to recognize the right or wrong actions (to reach the desired idea), which will provide a possibility for the decision of the "policymakers".<br />The result will be justified by describing what was extracted from the historical evidence of the Iranian research developers and comparing it with the description of the structure and function of the Research Council in the international literature.<br />Results<br />In this article, it is argued that since 54 years ago, there has been a strong motivation among policy-makers, not to realize the full mechanism of a research council as a mediating institution, but to transfer the successes of the international research council (i.e. institutions whose main task was mistakenly thought to be prioritizing and distributing funds for research).<br />Then, by presenting evidence showing that this incompletely understood mechanism was never realized as a well-functioning institution, it is suggested that the function of the institution in question, i.e., the research council, is realized when (not only) it includes the parts that seemed "obvious", but also the "hidden" parts of the council (i.e., the mediating nature of this institution).<br />For this purpose, firstly, a brief description and definition of research organizing institutions (i.e., research councils) as well as some new conceptual distinctions are described. In the following, the claim of the article will be documented by examining the most important efforts made during the half-century to establish the Research Council (in the sense described in the theoretical section). These efforts include 1- the first ideas put forth regarding the Research Council in 1967, which led to the establishment of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, 2- the establishment of the Institute for Research and Planning in Science and Education, 3- the establishment of the institutions that branched off from the Institute for Research and Planning in Science and Education, after Islamic Revolution, 4- The formation of the National Scientific Research Council 1974 and its reopening after the Islamic Revolution and its dissolution in 2002), and its continuation in the form of the Supreme Council of Science, research and technology<br />Discussion and Conclusions<br />The research shows that the function of all Iranian institutions that were initially established as research councils (if have not been dissolved) has changed. Although the remaining institutions are useful, they have become non-autonomous (and often government-serving) research units. This is in contrast to international research councils, which also play a role in protecting the autonomy of research institutions and scientific communities (and as a result, in impartial research prioritization). Since this issue has received less attention so far, after more than half a century, no mechanism at the level of Iranian research institutions realizes such a function.<br />It was also argued that in the history of Iranian research organizing institutions (i.e. research councils), the concealment of the second aspect, i.e. the lack of connection to autonomous scientific communities, (and the lack of awareness of its importance) has caused a direct relationship (employer and employee type) between the government and the research organizing council. The result of the direct relationship was that the research priorities made by the councils were always biased towards the government's demands, and, the gap between research and decision has been strengthened. It was also argued that not paying attention to the dual function of a Research Council is one of the reasons that caused any experience in shaping research organizing mechanisms to fulfill only one of these functions, leading to the loss of both functions and the change of its original nature.<strong> </strong>بیش از نیمسده (یعنی از سال 1346) است که سیاستگذاران و برنامهریزان علم و آموزش عالی در ایران در تلاش هستند که پژوهشهای کشور را بهنحوی سامان دهند که در زنجیرۀ برنامهریزیها و تحولات جامعه نقش مؤثرتری ایفا کند؛ اما این امکان، هیچگاه محقق نشده است. پژوهش از یکسو در درون اجتماعات علمی و مبتنی بر تعاملات و مناسبات اصیل میان دانشمندان انجام میشود و ازسویدیگر نیازمند ارتباط مشخص با مسائل اولویتدار (و لذا مشتریان دولتی و صنعتی) است. ازاینرو، سازوکارِ (بهلحاظ نهادی) مستقلی نیاز است که میان عاملان پژوهش (یعنی دانشگاهها و پژوهشگاهها) و نهادهای دارای منابع مالی (مثل دولت یا صنعت) واسطه شده و ازیکسو، منابع مالی را، مبتنی بر اولویتهایی که تشخیص میدهد، بهنحوی توزیع کند که استقلال نهادهای علمی و پژوهشی حفظ شود، و ازسویدیگر، مبتنی به استقلالی که به پژوهشگر و سازمان پژوهشی میدهد، ارزیابی مناسبی را از فعالیتهای پژوهشی ارائه کند؛ بهنحویکه کیفیت پژوهش را برای مشتریان صنعتی و دولتی تضمین کند.<br />در این مقاله با استدلال نظری و ارائۀ شواهد تاریخی، شرح داده خواهد شد که چطور دریافتی ناقص از این ساختار، و غالب شدن آن دریافت ناقص توسط دولتمردان، از بدو شکلگیریِ برخی از این قسم نهادها، وزن بیشتری را صرفاً به یک وجه از وظایف (یعنی ارتباط پژوهش با مسائل کشور) داده و وجه دیگر (یعنی حفظ استقلال و تعاملات علمی) را از قلم انداخته است، و اینکه چطور ناکام ماندن تلاشهای انجام شده برای ساماندهی پژوهش، از چنین شرایطی نتیجه شده است.https://method.rihu.ac.ir/article_2165_f74078cdd30a340f2191dc2195cec538.pdf