نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشگاه ملی مهارت
2 گروه حقوق، دانشکده حقوق و علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران. (نویسنده مسئول).
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
This study argues that structural challenges in public law are not the product of institutional weakness or the tension between tradition and modernity, but arise from an epistemic duality in understanding the nature of law. This duality is articulated between two competing intellectual frameworks: first, Objective Realism, which considers law and justice as pre-existing, discoverable realities independent of human convention; and second, Interest-Based Constructivism, which views legal norms as contingent, contractual products oriented toward efficacy and public interest. Using an analytical-genealogical approach, the article demonstrates that, at the theoretical level, the Iranian legal system adheres to a realist framework (discovering fixed divine standards), yet in governance, due to the imperatives of the modern nation-state, it increasingly relies on constructivist logic and instrumental rationality. This epistemic duality manifests in the functional tension between institutions safeguarding religious truth and bodies determining public interest. The findings indicate that the persistence of this situation generates inconsistency in the criteria legitimizing norms and reduces structural cohesion. Accordingly, sustainable resolution lies not in formal reforms but in reconstructing epistemic coherence, either through teleological reinterpretation (Maqasid al-Sharia) or conscious commitment to a consistent epistemological foundation.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله