It’, s frequently asked and answered “, how”,and “, why”,“, Iranian Constitutional Revolution”,“, happened”, ? The Constitutional Revolution of Iran has been the subject of many dissertations and investigations during the last century, and continues to receive scholarly attention increasingly. These attempts, however, do not deal with the conditions, under which the idea of the constitution was formed, the gradual development of social changes that finally have crystallized in the constitution, and the way in which the constitution got legitimacy. Briefly characterizing, most of the answers and explanations, are, in one way or another, examples of orientalism. They highlight the defeats of attempts to make reforms in political structures to limit the arbitrary will of the shah and governors of provinces, to bring about a liberty, justice, and so on,they point their finger to the strength of despotic structures and resistance of rulers against all of these reforms. They assert that the failure of reforms left no way except Revolution. So, Iranians, who then due to getting familiar with European countries were aware of the constitutional monarchy, when started to protest, started to ask for the constitution and finally they were able to force the shah to grant the constitution. The article tries through criticizing Katouzian and FORAN’, s explanations of Constitutional Revolution, and exploiting insights of Weber and Durkheim, historically situate the genesis of the so-called “, Iranian Constitution”,and explain complexities around its formation.

The technique of Qualitative Comparative Analysis, which is based on the Boolean algebra or the Boolean expansion of JOHN Stuart Mills' nominal comparison, is the implicit methodology of historical-comparative research. By employing this method, The analysts can evaluate different combinations of explanans as the causes of a single effect. Moreover, the Boolean algebra technique in the historical-comparative analysis is a useful means for the analysis of the data-set with Median N (10 to 50 cases).In the present paper, first of all attempts have been made to describe the main characteristics of the Boolean algebra and its application for the qualitative comparative analysis in social sciences. In the next step, FORAN's application of the Boolean analysis or his qualitative comparative analysis in studying the Iranian Revolution has been elucidated. As one of the most outstanding researchers in the field of comparative study of the Iranian Revolution, FORAN in his three works has applied Boolean algebra or qualitative comparative analysis to provide answers to various questions. Attempts have been made, in the present article, to comprehensively evaluate the results of FORAN's three works from the viewpoint of the Boolean methodology.

The comparative literature is one of the literature branches which enables us to perceive the similarities between intelligentsia and literati despite of the time and place differences among cultures and nations. Thus we were persuaded to compare Khaqani Shirvani – Iranian poet – and JOHN Donne – English poet – from two different countries with two different cultures. Some similarities could be observed in their looks to women despite of the time and place distances. The present article tries to survey two remarkable panegyrics on the ideal woman by allusions to some of their poems. The commonalities in their views have formed the basis of the present article.

JOHN Keats (1795-1821) is one of the most renowned and original poets in the history of English Literature. His first recorded poem was written in 1814 and entitled "Imitation of Spencer".In 1817 his first and in 1818 his second and 1820 his third and final volume of poetry was published. Although Keats was in many ways a typical poet in style of the Romantic Era, in many ways he showed his unique grasp of the fine art of poetry. With his great imagination and gift for writing,Keats wasable to translate the beautiful natural world about him into exquisite images in his poetry. He was also able to fuse poetry with painting and sculpture.One of the greatest of Keatss odes is "To Autumn". This poem was inspired by a Sunday walk ill Winchester as Keats admired the beauty of a fall day in the countryside.The images of autumn in their perfect beauty deep down represent the fall and deterioration of the health of the writer.It was one of the last and certainly the best odes that turned to be the fruit and the message of the last days of the writer. It was written in 1819 before his sail for Italy where he became seriously ill with consumption and died.

This article discusses JOHN McDowell’s ethical realism. It first gives a definition of realism in its broad sense and then gets to its particular meaning. Afterwards, Mackie’s view about the negation of the reality of values and ethical properties due to their not being involved in causal explanation is given. This is followed by McDowell’s response to the previous claim. McDowell, while rejecting Mackie’s understanding of secondary qualities, demonstrates that both secondary qualities and ethical properties are somehow introversive and depend on humans, but this dependency doesn’t contradict their reality. Ultimately, McDowell by giving a non-causal explanation of values and negating the exclusiveness of criteria for the reality of things in causal explanation, tries to expand the scope of the reality of things, and there fore to prove the reality of ethical properties.

One general categorization by some of the contemporary analytic philosophers divides the facts into institutional and brute. The characteristic of institutional facts is that they are constituted by collective recognition. Typically, these facts follow the constitutive rules formula: "X in C counts as Y". These facts have raised some important questions for philosophers: How is it possible that some facts are realized only through human recognition? What is the nature of institutional facts? Can we count them as objective? If yes, in what sense?Here we argue that the essence of institutional facts is status functions. Humans recognize these functions which contain a set of deontic powers through collective intentionality. Therefore, institutional facts are ontologically subjective and epistemologically objective. Nevertheless, objectivity of institutional facts totally depends on language; which itself is a fundamental institution for other institutions.

In order to explain the concept of justice and its place in international arena, JOHN Rawls formulates the principles that are arisen from international convention which can be reasonably and unanimously acceptable by all states, as a common and fair base. In examining the foreign policy of liberal democratic states, he measures and evaluates the relations of those states with other states, only with respect to the observance of mentioned principles on behalf of them. Thus, the relations of liberal democratic states with other liberal democracies (the so-called decent states) can happen freely and equally in all areas while those relations with the burdened states on the one hand and the outlaw states on the other are simply imaginable only in forms of economic assistance and just war respectively. In Rawls's viewpoint, this will be real meaning of justice in international arena. This concept today has provided the necessary theoretical foundations to justify the unilateral and arbitrary behavior of world powers in international arena.

One of the significant issues in religious epistemology is how to describe and justify faith. In religious epistemology, various descriptive and justifying models of faith have been proposed, one of which is faith as an “evidential venture.” In this view, one who is aware of the absence of sufficient reasons, in respect of evidential ambiguity, can Venture in favor of religious belief or faith. This article introduces two descriptive models of faith from the viewpoint of JOHN Bishop and JOHN Schellenberg –two significant proponents of faith as an evidential venture. The next step discusses how they evaluate their faith models in terms of four criteria: evidential, psychological, moral, and practical. JOHN Bishop presents his faith model as a fully-doxastic venture, and JOHN Schellenberg as a nondoxastic venture. Finally, by comparing these two models, some features that should be considered in proposing descriptive and justifying models of faith are mentioned: paying attention to diachronic justification besides the synchronic one, paying attention to the epistemic sensitivity of the believers based on an outsider concern about religion, and considering the personal and psychological distinctions among each person of believers and nonbelievers.

JOHN I. Liontas, Ph.D., is an associate professor of foreign languages, English for speakers of other languages (ESOL), and technology in education and second language acquisition (TESLA), and director and faculty of the TESLA doctoral program at the University of South Florida. He has over 30 years of K-20+teaching experience and research in the United States and other countries, has held several academic faculty and administrative positions in higher education, and has taught a wide range of language and academic content courses. He has also directed, coordinated, and administered language and academic programs at various US institutions and sits on several local, state, regional, national, and international academic bodies as director, managing editor, chair, reviewer, evaluator, or appointed/elected member. He is an active member of several (inter) national learned societies and has participated as PI and Co-PI on several multimillion dollar funded projects.