Mohammad Nezhadiran; Rozhan Hesam Ghazi
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to review and criticize the theory of Iranian modernity, Ali Mirsepasi, as one of the most important analyses that has been done on the Iranian in face of modernity which has tried to present multiple models of modernity as a new theory. The current study has used the analytical-critical ...
Read More
The purpose of this study was to review and criticize the theory of Iranian modernity, Ali Mirsepasi, as one of the most important analyses that has been done on the Iranian in face of modernity which has tried to present multiple models of modernity as a new theory. The current study has used the analytical-critical method, while analyzing the main features of the theory of Iranian modernity, evaluating and criticizing its critical and positive aspects in the study of contemporary Iranian developments. Shortcomings of his analysis include paying great attention to the intellectual and cultural aspects of Iranian modernity while not paying attention to the structural and institutional aspects of it which effects the development of modernity. Moreover role of intellectuals in promoting political Islam and traditional forces and institutions in the Islamic Revolution have not been addressed. One of the most important findings of the current research is shedding light on positive aspects of his proposed model, which is based on the diversity of cultural and historical experiences of modernity and the attempt to draw a non-European-oriented image of it. The general result of this research indicates that the theory of Iranian modernity, while presenting a new approach and perspective to the study of contemporary Iranian history, postpones some of its crucial aspects emphasizing the need for new research.
Mohammad Bitarafan; Sohrab Yazdani; Hossein Moftakhari; Hojjat Fallah Tootkar
Abstract
The structure of education in the Qajar dynasty was derived from tradition and was as a kind of reading of religious principles. Three basic components in this period created the process of change in the structure of education in the field of the feminine gender: a) the attention given by European graduates ...
Read More
The structure of education in the Qajar dynasty was derived from tradition and was as a kind of reading of religious principles. Three basic components in this period created the process of change in the structure of education in the field of the feminine gender: a) the attention given by European graduates and the intellectuals of the last two decades of the reign of Naser al- adin Shah to the matter of “educating” the women, b) the establishment of schools for girls by American, English and French missionaries in Iran, and c) the introduction of the concept of equality in the constitutional revolution of Iran. The reality is that women's empowerment was one of the main concerns and acts of the constitutionalist intellectuals. As the social relations in the Qajar period did not allow for a solution for the equality issue of women to be introduced, thinking about and using the religious and social concepts in the areas of education and health could bring about the initial changes regarding the female gender was perceived. Therefore, showing attention to the improvement of the social status of Iranian women and the public benefit derived from it thereof, became the main concern of the constitutionalists in the field of women. However, the shift in social traditions caused an extreme reaction from the supporters of the discourse of tradition in regards to the matter of women’s education and the establishment of schools for girls. Hence, many conflicts arose which took place in different contexts such as the parliament, the state, city councils, newspapers, etc. In fact, the introduction of main concepts of constitutionalism such as freedom, law and equality which somewhat were connected to the matter of women, became the main focus point for the conflicts between the discourses of tradition and modernity.
Nezam Bahrami Komeil
Abstract
Many scholars, especially sociologists, believe that the contrast between tradition and modernity is one of the most important challenges our society faces. In other words, in addition to issues such as distrust, addiction, generation gap, sex and lack of responsibility, the conflict between tradition ...
Read More
Many scholars, especially sociologists, believe that the contrast between tradition and modernity is one of the most important challenges our society faces. In other words, in addition to issues such as distrust, addiction, generation gap, sex and lack of responsibility, the conflict between tradition and modernity has turned into a fundamental and costly problem which has affected our society over the past century. There are three main viewpoints regarding the confrontation between tradition and modernity: (1) considering tradition as the basis and believing in rereading of it; (2) considering modernity as the basis and accepting its basic components; and (3) integrating tradition and modernity and creating a conditional modernity i.e. local modernity. In Iran, those in favor of the first viewpoint are known as ‘reactionists’, and those supporting the second one are known as ‘westoxified’. There are also some people who wish to be labeled neither reactionist nor westoxified, and want to prove that they think beyond that. Therefore, they talk of integration of tradition and modernity. Jalal Al-e Ahmad is a follower of this view, who believes that relying on the local culture and tradition, some aspects of Western modernity can be ‘adopted’ and some other components can be ‘established’ based on the domestic capacities. In other words, he believes that without the necessity of changing the Eastern epistemological foundations, we can appropriate the material and technological dimensions of the West. In the present paper, the viewpoint of Jalal is analyzed by presenting an analytical model, in which ‘innate control’ and ‘constructed control’ are distinguished.
