Amin Navakhti Moghaddam; Seyyed Mokhtar Mousavi
Abstract
There are two grand discourses about human sciences: first, universal discourse of human sciences, which is rooted in discussion related to humanities and natural sciences and prescribes ...
Read More
There are two grand discourses about human sciences: first, universal discourse of human sciences, which is rooted in discussion related to humanities and natural sciences and prescribes a single copy of formula for science including human sciences; second, discourse of native or Islamic humanities that find the opportunity to express after the independence of third world countries, including Muslim communities. The discursive debate in Iran, particularly after the Islamic Revolution, was a clear manifestation that is continues. In this article by focusing on the nature of humanities and various readings of scholars about the issue, posed the question that the nature of human and social sciences has greater affinity to which of two indigenous or universal discourse. The answer to this question and result of survey of hypothesis, by reliance on the method library-based research and analytical analysis was that with regard to the substantive aspects of human sciences, the dual nature of assumed-real statements, none of two discourses alone can guard and guide the system of humanity knowledge in different countries. As a result, engagement of global and local discourse of human sciences is necessary for nutrition of the general-fixed and variable-specific aspects of system of human and social sciences. Quality of interactive combination of global and local discourse of human sciences in the light of the realities and requirements is the index of a country's scientific progress or regress
