عطاء الله رفیعی آتانی The Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Fundamental Researches on Humanities 2476-745x 11 1 2025 6 1 Attributing Psychology to Islam through Rational Judgment: With an Emphasis on the Thought of Muḥaqqiq al-Irāqī 11 40 FA Mohsen Akbari Seyyed Mostafa Hosseini Nasab Based on the principle of the correlation (mulāzama) between rational judgment and Sharī‘a, if psychology can be considered rational, its attribution to Islam can likewise be established. The present study aims to explicate the attribution of psychology to Islam through rational judgment, with an emphasis on the thought of Muhaqqiq ‘Iraqi. To this end, the works of scholars of *uṣūl al‑fiqh*, particularly Muhaqqiq ‘Iraqi, were examined with regard to the conditions for the validity of rational judgment and its correlation with Islamic teachings. This approach was used to clarify the role of rational judgment in grounding Islamic psychology. According to the findings, the principle of correlation between rational judgment and Sharī‘a in Islamic psychology is—due to its reliance on the notions of *ḥusn* and *qubḥ*—restricted to the domain of normative judgments. Moreover, the application of this principle depends on four conditions:  1. The psychological recommendation must be among the matters acknowledged (imḍā’ī) by Sharī‘a.  2. Before issuing a rational judgment of goodness or badness regarding the psychological recommendation, its pure or predominant benefit or harm must be established.  3. Certainty or at least strong assurance (*iṭmi’nān*) must be attained with respect to the rational ruling.  4. Before attributing psychology to Islam through rational judgment, the relevant transmitted sources must be examined, and the absence of any textual repudiation of the premises of the definitive rational ruling or the content of the confidence‑based ruling must be verified.  

عطاء الله رفیعی آتانی The Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Fundamental Researches on Humanities 2476-745x 11 1 2025 6 1 The Secularization Theorem in Iranian Studies Approaches 43 67 FA Morteza Bahrani ISCS The concept and process of secularization, as long as it carries meanings such as world-ly-zation, presupposes a theorem; that the new is a transformation of the old and has no legitimacy without acknowledging it. This idea, despite hermeneutic appeals to distance itself from the theorem, preserves the principle of the theorem in any explanation it adopts; in such a way that the theorem has become a subjective syndrome. This is while those who advocate the secularization theorem have failed to specify the two sides of the theorem and the subjectivity of the transformation. The theorem, when it reaches a country like Iran from its origin, namely Western countries, takes on a more severe state: they insist not only descriptively but also normatively that since the West modernized from its tradition, then we too can modernize by resorting to our tradition. This is how secularization theorems do not have an explanatory load; Rather, and by comparison, even if European equations have a literary value, what is common among us is merely a kind of fantasy and has a dream repair; a dream must be interpreted: it cannot explain. What is absent from the stage of the theorem is the human self-affirmation that accepts responsibility for its action in the world. Iranian secular theorem-makers generally refer to a source: the ancient past, the after future, or even the late West, which has manifested itself in the idea of total Westernization; while it can be argued that modernity has a functional break with tradition and its concepts; without the subjective acceptance of this did-continuity, any explanation of modernity in any other realm simply increases the costs of progress.  

عطاء الله رفیعی آتانی The Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Fundamental Researches on Humanities 2476-745x 11 1 2025 6 1 Realizing the Civilization-Building Scientific Authority of the Revolution Reconfiguring the Humanities with the Model of Systemic-Religious Theorizing 69 109 FA Mohammad Hossein Golkar Institute of Strategic Studies of Islamic Sciences and Teachings Mohammad Ali Golkar Institute of Strategic Studies of Islamic Sciences and Teachings Fatemeh Golkar Institute of Strategic Studies of Islamic Sciences and Teachings The realization of the new Islamic civilization and the attainment of scientific authority depends on transcending Western secular humanities, which are built solely upon instrumental rationality and materialistic anthropology. The main problem of this research is how to move beyond the crisis of ineffectiveness in existing structures and to present a valid method for extracting the “software of governing society” from religious sources. This study, using an analytical–inferential method and drawing on the logic of “systemic modeling,” while critiquing rival paradigms (the secular approach and the purificatory approach), elucidates the theory of “systemic-religious theorizing.” The findings of the research show that although the modern humanities in the West, by moving beyond crude positivism, have turned to multidimensional models (biological, psychological, social, and spiritual) and have acknowledged the role of religion in “giving meaning” to life, this attention has mostly remained at a “functional” and “psychological” level. Based on philosophical foundations and the views of thinkers such as Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, while accepting non-contradictory scientific achievements and avoiding a monolithic view of the West, the distinguishing point of this study lies in the transition from the “human in need of meaning” to the “networked human.” In this paradigm, the human being is not merely seeking psychological calm; rather, he is defined as a being whose felicity depends on the precise regulation of real connections with the tawhidi and unseen network—connections that are governed not by spiritual tastes, but by the “revelatory software” and the ontological laws of the world. The results indicate that by utilizing “systemic ijtihad” and activating the capacities of fiqh, religious propositions can be transformed into operational models; a strategy that is the primary condition for moving from the consumption of knowledge to the production of a civilization-building scientific authority. 

عطاء الله رفیعی آتانی The Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Fundamental Researches on Humanities 2476-745x 11 1 2025 6 1 The Evolution of the Qur'an's Interaction with Contemporary Culture and Its Role in the Transformation of the Humanities within the Muslim Interpretive Tradition (From the Age of Revelation to the Modern Era) 111 148 FA Leila Ramazannia Samakoush Mohammad Sharifi Seyyed Qasem Hosseini The issue of "the relationship between the Qur'an and contemporary culture" and the nature of their interaction has become a central focus of Qur'anic studies in recent decades. While some Orientalists, based on historical-critical methods, have spoken of the Qur'an's "influence" and "borrowing" from previous religions and traditions, this question has also been raised within the Islamic tradition from perspectives such as the "language of the people" (lisān al-qawm), "Arab custom" (ʿurf al-ʿarab), and the "rhetorical styles of the Qur'an." Accepting or denying any form of interaction between the Qur'an and contemporary culture directly affects the Qur'an's scholarly authority over the humanities. This article aims to reconstruct the historical development of the idea of the Qur'an's interaction with contemporary culture within the Muslim interpretive tradition, from the age of revelation to the modern era, and its impact on the humanities. The research method is descriptive-analytical with a historical-thematic approach, and data have been collected based on the study of key Qur'anic commentaries (tafsīr) across four main periods: (1) The first period, from the age of revelation to the end of the 4th century AH, during which interaction occurs at the lexical and customary level and responds to the accusations of the polytheists; (2) The second period, from the 5th to the 9th century AH, featuring a rhetorical-rational approach in works such as Al-Kashshāf and Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb; (3) The third period, from the 10th to the 13th century AH, which consolidates the principle of "the language of the people" in scholastic commentaries; (4) The contemporary period, with new formulations in the views of traditional-reformist commentators and hermeneutic modernists, ultimately proving the authority and enduring scholarly validity of the Qur'an for the humanities. The findings indicate that the idea of interaction has roots in the Muslim interpretive heritage and has evolved from the level of customary explanation to that of an interpretive principle and then to a hermeneutic theory. One of the significant outcomes of this interaction is the continued scholarly authority of the Qur'an across various fields of human knowledge. Finally, this article defends a reading of "the Qur'an's guiding interaction with culture," according to which the Qur'an aligns itself with contemporary culture at the level of language and expression, while remaining guiding and critical of that same culture at the level of message and objectives.  

عطاء الله رفیعی آتانی The Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Fundamental Researches on Humanities 2476-745x 11 1 2025 6 1 Paradigmatic Methodology of Grounded Theory of Divorce Articles in Iran 151 183 FA Mahdi hoseinzade yazdi Sayyed mohsen mollabashi According to statistics from the Civil Registration Organization, divorce is an increasing phenomenon; of course, in each country, it has specific causes and factors, and it is no secret to anyone how much people involved in it suffer from crisis. Due to the consequences of divorce for individuals in society and the subsequent creation of adverse social consequences, including harming the family institution, reducing it is one of the goals of policymakers, and to achieve this goal, it is necessary to produce theories that can properly organize the causes, factors, and solutions to reduce it in a scientific manner. One way to organize a scientific theory, even with a limited scope, is the grounded theory method.  Many researchers have tried to serve society in this way; but due to their unfamiliarity with the methodological framework of grounded theory, they have made fundamental errors in conducting research that have damaged the credibility of their research. Accordingly, the question of this research is what are the methodological indicators of the grounded theory method and how to fundamentally criticize research based on these indicators. The method of this research is also paradigmatic methodology, and in addition to extracting these indicators, we try to criticize a number of grounded theory articles on the topic of divorce based on these indicators and help them become more scientific.

عطاء الله رفیعی آتانی The Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Fundamental Researches on Humanities 2476-745x 11 1 2025 6 1 Analyzing the Role of A priori Foundations in the Formation of Divergence between Demonstrative and Explanatory Paradigms: A Comparative Study of Religious Studies in the Thoughts of Javadi Amoli and Durkheim 185 225 FA Mohammadmohsen Tohidinia Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. Raziyeh Joodaki This research deals with a comparative and critical examination of the relationship between two important approaches in the study of religion, namely the “demonstrative” method with an emphasis on the thoughts of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli and the “explanatory” method with a focus on the views of Emile Durkheim. The main issue of the research is that the differences between theories of religion often arise not from empirical data, but from their a priori foundations and paradigmatic principles. Therefore, the present research attempts to analyze the conceptual foundations that have led to the divergence of these two approaches in understanding and formulating the phenomenon of religion. This study is organized in a meta-methodological analysis format with a qualitative approach and using descriptive-analytical and comparative methods, and its data has been extracted through library resources and primary works. The analyses have been conducted based on three fundamental indicators of ontology, anthropology, and epistemology. The findings show that the demonstrative paradigm considers religion as an objective and metaphysical truth based on the originality of existence, while the explanatory paradigm reduces it to the level of social reality and collective representations. This fundamental difference causes each paradigm to determine in advance the limits and manner of knowing religion within the framework of its theoretical assumptions. A critical examination of this situation shows that establishing hard boundaries between these two approaches can lead to reductionism and a kind of methodological imperialism. Accordingly, the present study suggests that instead of mutually rejecting these paradigms, a meta-methodological framework should be adopted in which the demonstrative method in explaining the truth of religion and the explanatory method in analyzing its social and historical dimensions are used complementary.