Search

In this essay, an attempt is made to reflect on the relation between philosophy and Humanities, with a new look and attention to its hermeneutical foundations. The assertion of this study is that there is every kind of branch of knowledge that exists in the philanthropists, which is based on a metaphysical and philosophical look that is based on a hermeneutic foundation. Hence, for Humanities, there is no possibility of spontaneity in philosophy and metaphysics. According to the relation that man has with understanding and in general, "hermeneutics", we have spoken about the pluralism in the field of philosophy and metaphysics, and we showed how different disciplines Which is in the field of humanism, must inevitably be based on a general and profound view that reveals itself in the domain of excellence, which is metaphysical knowledge. At the end of this paper, we have shown how, based on this hermeneutical foundation, the possibility of the emergence of "special metaphysics", based on the ideas on the relation between philosophy and Humanities, and the points that can exist in the relation between metaphysics and scholars of Humanities, It is possible to speak and how the holiness in such a situation (according to our indigenous, national, religious, and cultural needs) is matured and perfected, and we have also pointed out that how can one find a way through the relations that can exist between philosophy and Humanities? "Philosophical Hermeneutics," or more precisely, "hermeneutical philosophy" is a phenomenological approach to the category of "understanding," which the philosophical foundation reflects on the understanding and process of realization of understanding. Therefore, all human existential proportions are formed on the basis of the understanding and relationship of the deity with the being, and all predecessors, preconceptions and predecessors constituting the existential identity of his understanding, and of course, may originate from a diverse range of subjects, such as society, religion, politics, culture, The family ... and many other things that somehow compromise human qualities or, in the words of Heidegger, in the universe. Of course, this expression should not lead to the illusion that the criterion and the areas of truth are lost, and that pluralism occurs in the realm of knowledge, and ultimately leads to relativism and skepticism. Because Heidegger himself was also aware of this, he spoke of the remoteness of understanding, which is an integral part of the structure and conditionality of understanding, and understanding without it is not possible. Dasein, though initially, approaches his identification with his earlier understanding. But there is the possibility of rival projections that, with consideration of the subject, will be successively combined to achieve a meaningful unity for Dasein. Therefore, the mission of the practice of understanding and interpretation is to find suitable projections, and in these projections, with different origins of understanding and interpretation, different horizons are intermingled and the possibility of dialogue between them is provided. This discernment is more in the field of Humanities, since, as mentioned at the beginning of this essay, the foundations of methodology, ontology, anthropology, and epistemology, and many other such metaphysical foundations interfere in the understanding and interpretation and process. Despite this interdependence, which occurs in the process of understanding and interpretation, it can be spoken in the context of the philosophic and social as a result of the plurality and multiplicity of metaphysical foundations of humanism or socialism with a religious or secular, Islamic or Christian and Jewish character. Because that stipulates this waiver. Even more so, we can speak of religious and Islamic culture from various religious and Islamic diversities, and, on the other hand, under Western culture and civilization, we also see different scholars based on different philosophies and philosophical schools. Turning to the hermeneutic foundation in this article, the groundwork of ideas and theories, and theorizing reflection and exploration in diverse and varied approaches to the philosopher's will provide. The attentiveness of opinion and dialogue between philosophers and specialists in humanities leads to a desirable outcome if, on the one hand, the philosopher and the scholars of philosophy of studies are in the realm of experiences associated with humanism, in such a way that he addresses the main methods and fundamental concepts in which Science is used to recognize. On the other hand, those working in the field of Humanities must also become acquainted with the language of philosophers, so that they can work together in a mutually beneficial way and open up new horizons. Regarding what was said in this essay, it becomes clear that the philosopher (with the new approach we talked about in this essay) cannot provide for metaphysical philosophies and contemplations, but at the same time, given the pluralism that exists in philosophical reflections We are confronted with a large number of philosophers and philosophical schools that may have a fundamental difference between them while they share common ground in their thoughts. There are various approaches philosophers can have on certain issues such as being, truth, human beings, society, religion, etc., as well as the attention of philosophers and metaphysical subjects to the achievements of other branches of human sciences and sciences, and as a result These interdisciplinary studies also lead to a variety of different perspectives and developments in various branches of folklore. Humanities in the contemporary world are faced with a fundamental challenge. Contemporary humanities based on the principles of theology, anthropology and epistemology and other basic principles, and so far as these foundations, with regard to the scientific and epistemic heritage of mankind, do not change in other branches of science, we cannot see a change in the native and patriotic Humanities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to shed some light on the Philosophical relationship between humanities and technology. It will be explained that most disciplines in humanities are Janus-faced: they are part science/knowledge and part technology. The thesis of the paper is that the relationship between the technological aspect of humanities and other technologies is positive and synergetic, while the relationship between their scientific aspect and technologies is almost entirely critical and negative. The argument of the paper is not that the scientific aspect of humanities has nothing positive to offer to the development of technologies, but rather to clarify the nature of this assistance. It is also hoped that the paper’s analysis could help to explain how the scientific aspect of humanities can partake in the process of rationalisation of the development of technology

Humanities graduates have serious concerns about their employment status in the society. The increase in graduates in this field, especially due to the growing number of higher educational institutes in the country, requires policymakers to adopt more logical and practical measures to deal with the problem. Using future research, the current paper aims to draw a picture of the employment status of humanities graduates. The research method is qualitative, with the statistical population being professors and experts in the field of humanities. There is purposeful sampling method where the data collection tool was a semi-structured interview. After implementing the interviews, its components were identified at the level of litany, social causes, discourse/worldview and myth/metaphor. At the litany level, categories of "unemployment crisis", "abandoned and marginalized humanities", "inefficient/unskilled humanities" and "lack of independent identity" were created. At the level of systematic causes, a set of cultural-social and economic factors are marked as fundamental ones. At the level of discourse/worldview, product-oriented, post-modern, Islamic humanities and problem-oriented discourses were used. At the level of metaphor/myth, metaphorical interpretations of the boy of engineer, Professor Balthazar, the Achilles heel of national development and advanced/regressive sciences were used. Finally, with a literature review and referring to the interviews and going back and forth and asking the opinion of experts and specialists, the two driving forces of an engineering-like and top-down view against the provision of open intellectual and academic space and the policy of unifying sciences were found. In contrast to the development of interdisciplinary studies approach, four scenarios were identified and developed.

Purpose: In addition to the distinction between the field of humanities and other sciences in terms of their nature and research goals, different disciplines within the humanities also possess distinct characteristics. This study aims to identify the disadvantages of evaluating humanities research outputs, with a specific focus on the fields of language and literature. It also aims to provide solutions to improve the evaluation of researchers in these areas. Methodology: The present study is an applied type research with a qualitative content analysis method. The study's statistical population included faculty members from language and literature fields with various Persian and non-Persian orientations (English, Arabic, French, German, and Chinese) in Iran. The research sample consisted of 24 individuals, including 19 men and 5 women who were at least Assistant professors from 8 universities: Isfahan, Tarbiat Modarres, Tehran, Al-Zahra, Shahid Chamran Ahvaz, Shiraz, Allameh Tabatabaei, and Ferdowsi of Mashhad. The participants were selected using targeted sampling and the snowball method. The semi-structured interview was used as a research tool, and MAXQDA 2020 qualitative data analysis software was utilized for coding. Theoretical coding involves three stages: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. To ensure credibility, the opinions of two coders were sought. Also, the results of the coding were sent to three interviewees who played a significant role in expressing injuries and proposing solutions. They were asked to comment on the compatibility of the extracted codes with their own experiences. The terms and details of the work are explained in detail within the plan for the transferability criterion. In order to measure dependability, all the stages and processes of the research were recorded and reported accurately from the beginning to the end, mentioning the details of the data analysis, and excerpts from the text of the interviews were presented. For confirmability, the findings were provided to 5 interviewees and peers to express their opinions about the results. Findings: Evaluation harms were identified through 62 codes. The concept of science production and the promotion of knowledge foundations were investigated in two general areas (humanities) and a specific area (language and literature) with different components. The general area includes the establishment of policies for evaluating research output, the inclusion of research output ratings in promotion regulations, and considerations of research ethics. The specific area includes the evaluation of research outputs in the promotion regulations, publications, international article publications, theoretical contributions, research style of faculty members, and literary and creative works. The concept of practicality and addressing societal issues also encompasses two aspects: disconnecting the relationship between language and literature fields and society, and teaching language and literature fields. The solutions were presented in the form of 34 codes. The concept of science production and the promotion of knowledge foundations were investigated in two general areas (humanities) and a specific area (language and literature) with different components. The general area includes the development of policies for evaluating research output, the inclusion of research output ratings in promotion regulations, and the improvement of research facilities and resources. The specific area includes the evaluation of research outputs in the promotion regulations, the research approach of faculty members, and research facilities. The concept of practicality and addressing societal issues also encompasses two aspects of applied research: the connection between the disciplines of language and literature and society. Conclusion: If the evaluation is conducted accurately and comprehensively, and it clearly indicates the gap between the current situation and the desired outcome, it will minimize trial and error in this field and reduce costs associated with ineffective and unnecessary tasks. It accelerates the steps towards success and progress. The essence of evaluation is optimizing performance. The competition to obtain the best scientific position among researchers, educational groups, and research institutes has gained great importance and momentum. The health of such a competition and its correct orientation will be possible through planning for accurate evaluation, and a review of the evaluation policy of academic faculty members of universities and higher education is one of the fundamental needs in this direction. The results of the present study can be utilized as an effective measure to enhance the current situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of the present study is to compare the thematic trends of scientific productions related to Covid 19 in the fields of humanities and social sciences in Iran and the leading countries of the five continents based on the studies of Web of Science. Methodology: The present scientometric research has a descriptive-analytical interdisciplinary approach through social network and co-word analysis techniques which is one of the methods of content analysis. Bibexecl, Gephi, and SPSS software were used to analyze the data, and VosViewer software was used to draw thematic clusters. Findings: The United States, England, China, Australia, and South Africa are the leading countries. Iran ranks 37th in the world and 13th in Asia. Co-word clustering in US studies consisted of 6 clusters, in Chinese and South African studies, 7 clusters, in British studies, 8 clusters, in Australian and Iranian studies 10 clusters. The clusters of "China and Australia", "The UK, and the United States" have thematic overlap, however, there are more clusters in the studies of Australia and Iran. There is a positive and significant relationship between the amounts of scientific production related to Covid 19 in humanities and social sciences and the prevalence of the disease (number of patients) in Iran and the leading countries. There was no significant difference between countries in terms of the number of citations received; The number of scientific productions of countries in the fields of humanities and social sciences and health is not significantly different from each other; There is a positive and significant relationship between the rate of scientific production of Covid 19 in the fields of humanities and social sciences and the prevalence of the disease (number of patients) in Iran and leading countries. Conclusion: Based on the results, the emergence of Covid-19 as an important health and social issue has made the management of various economic, social, cultural, and political complications inevitable. It is in this direction that in the results of this research, the repetition of concepts such as empowerment, participation, governance, management, and crisis management, etc. can be seen. This shows the existence of new thinking and policies in the post-coronavirus era to control and contain such a crisis. Also, according to the results of the research, "depression, mental health, risk, social media, crisis management, influence" are frequent in Chinese studies from the Asian continent. The most centrality of degree, closeness, and betweenness is related to the concept of "resilience". In England, from the European continent, "higher education, online learning, management, innovation, mental health, depression, society, engagement, motivation, knowledge" are the most important trends of researchers. The most centrality of the degree, closeness, and betweenness is related to the keywords "crisis and motivation". In the United States of America, "depression, stress, social support, education, participation, influence, management, leadership, employment, self-education, distance education, and science" are more common and the most important subject tendencies of researchers in this field. The most centrality of the degree, closeness, and intermediateness is related to the keyword "distance education". The most centrality of the degree, closeness, and intermediation is "distance education". "Social media, education, literacy, society, satisfaction, influence, mental health, poverty, governance, and humanities" are frequent in South African studies from the African continent and constitute the most important intellectual tendencies of researchers in this field; The most centrality of degree, closeness, and intermediateness is "higher education and poverty". In the studies of Australia from the Oceania continent, "education, technology, tourism, management, science, culture, social work, mental health, depression, anxiety, neoliberalism" are frequent and important and are the most important trends of researchers; The most centrality of degree, closeness and intermediateness is related to "crisis and gender". In Iranian studies, "depression, influence, behavior, perception of risk" have a central place among the most important tendencies of researchers; In the studies of this country, the most centrality of degree, closeness, and intermediateness is related to the keyword "simulation". In this way, in the subject area under discussion, there are also differences in the subject tendencies between countries. However, in a general look at the results of the cluster analysis of the studied countries, it can be said that the clusters of the countries of China and Australia with topics such as "technology and media, management and mental health" and the clusters of the countries of England and the United States with topics such as "depression, society, education, participation, management, online learning, and science and knowledge" have thematic overlap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conducting research in humanities sciences in Iran is faces with different barriers, including the small number of researchers, financial resources shortage, weak research infrastructure, etc. Adressing these barriers is required for advancement in humanities sciences and exploring these barriers is the first step to address them, properly. The purpose of this study is to identify the key challenges of and barriers to research in the field of humanities in Iran. Several studies have been shed light on challenges of conducting research in humanities in Iran, which contain relevant data. In this research, through a "systematic review", 32 relevant studies (such as theses and dissertations, journal articles, and conference papers) were sampled for fulltext reading and analysis. Collected data were analyzed by coding method and dimensions of barriers were identified. Nearly 200 barriers to research in the humanities have been highlighted in academic literature, which can be summarized into 93 indicators and seven broad dimensions, namley poor social context, weak infrastructure, inefficient organization and management, inappropriate policy-making, incompetent researchers, incompatible rules and regulations, and distinct nature of humanities sciences. Perhaps policy-makers have been played a significant role in emergence of barriers. This study is the first attempt to take a comprehensive view on the barriers and challenges of conducting research in the humanities in Iran. The research policy-makers and decision-makers must be aware of the barriers and challenges that are impactful on research in order to design and implement appropriate and efficient policies and plans. The findings of this study can provide a better understanding of the barriers to reaserch in humanities sciences in Iran.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between humanities and development of Iran in the era of globalization and provide solutions for strengthening the humanities in order to have a favorable impact on the development process of the country. Accordingly, the main question of the study is, how can the humanities in Iran help achieve the country in the age of globalization? In this research, using the descriptive-analytical method, the question is answered. The hypothesis of the article is that humanities can only help Iran achieve development in the era of globalization, which generally addresses its weaknesses, addresses the requirements of the process of globalization and better interacts with the centers of human sciences Out of the country. The overall result of the research is that, given that the humanities in Iran are faced with fundamental deficiencies and this has led to the fact that this field cannot play the role of the development of the country as it should, Therefore, planners and scholars of the humanities in the country should provide the country with a view to development, taking into account the requirements and developments arising from the process of globalization in educating rational and efficient people.

Background and Aim: Data extracted from ISI databases (indexes) and the scientometric indicators are the bases of judgment on scientific influence and developments. This review article aimed at explaining possible differences in the scientometrics of sciences, social sciences and humanities based on ISI’s scientometric indicators. Material and Methods: Reanalyzing statistical data of some scientometric literature, extracting data from ISI Web of Knowledge and reviewing literature, these differences were explored in this paper. Findings: Limits of these databases in one hand and natural and inherent differences among scholarship fields and disciplines in other hand questioned the same use and similar interpretation of these indicators. Factors account to arise such differences include among others: discrepancies in ISI coverage of science, social science and humanities, different national/international orientation of ISI indexed journals in terms of different scholarship fields, disciplines and domains, variations in theatrical developments and consequent variations in citing and publishing behaviors of scholars, different publication formats and different target audience, language barriers (domination of English language in ISI indexes), tendency to one-authored publishing in some soft/qualitative fields, and citation to multiple written communication media in social science and humanities rather than in science. Conclusion: Considering the limitations of ISI scientometric indicators in evaluating all disciplines and fields, a methodology including current reformed methods in scientometrics and peer judgment is needed for achieving the best way, especially for scientometrics in qualitative fields of social science and humanities.

The method is an essential and determining element in any action for being successful; among them, the method is of high importance in research and studying. In this respect, the study and research are not so important per se, as how it’s fulfilled. The present paper aims to introduce the general method with unlimited application in order to do the interdisciplinary research and study and also enumerate the analysis and usage of critical thinking to present it as a general method to fulfill the interdisciplinary study and research of Humanities.