This discourse with the jurisprudence philosophical and theological principles claims that what can be explained by the dynamics of jurisprudence, the explanation of the termination of the prophetic prophecy, is more precisely considered at the origins and presentation of jurisprudence in a system that is effective with the privilege of internal consistency by using the method of ijtihad Responding to the questions and needs of contemporary humans. In this regard, we will prove two things. First of all, from the context of the foundations and goals that we call school, it is possible to infer some general rules and principles. Second, based on the foundations and rules of the author and using The ijtih method came up with legal and legal propositions,Many will lead. The systems that are objective objectives of the foundations and goals will flow in the fields of economics, politics, law, etc. In the following, based on the meaningfulness and cognition of the concepts of jurisprudence, the theory of coherence will be fixed as an important feature of a legal system. The systematic approach of jurisprudential propositions, while evaluating inefficient jurisprudence based on secular thought, provides for the effective and maximum presence of the jurisprudence of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) in social terms.

The Seljooqids established the first and widest Iranian Empire after Islam and the Strongest power of the eastern territory of the Islam world. During the middle ages, the seljooqid government was successful in political and military fields. After overcoming the Ghaznavis, they even conquered the Abbassides, occupied Baghdad and made it their own territory. By following the Abbassids' governors superficially, they reinforced their authority and political legitimacy. They fought their civil foes, specially the Esmaillids and foreign powerful rivals like Egyptian Fatemids. The crusades occurred during their dynasty. Hence, their governing method, particularly feudal system, led to their weakness, deterioration, and finally their fall. One of the most important issues of the seljooqid dynasty was the depression of development of RATIONAL SCIENCES, particularly philosophy, dialectics and intellectuality. The basis of this depression and tendency began in the Ghaznavid era. It has lots of reasons including the political aims of the seljooqids, their religious bias, religious and governmental policies of the Abbassid governors, from Motevakkel and his followers, the opposition of titleholders such as khwaja Nezamolmolk with RATIONAL SCIENCES the suppression of Mo'atazela, the domination of Ashari word, the enhancement of social classification and being superficially religious, the abusing of religion in order to suppress rivals, the suppression of the Shiites, the opposition of the scholars (clergymen), the jurists, the literary men and poets with philosophy and ralional SCIENCES.

Our analysis of Popper’s philosophy of science focuses on his concepts of tradition and situational analysis. These concepts represent innovative Popperian contributions to a historical and hermeneutical turn in philosophy of science that most of his critics, especially Kuhn, fail to recognize. According to his historical view, Popper conceives SCIENCES as a complex of traditions in continuous transformation and progress by means of RATIONAL discussion of theories. In order to grasp the RATIONAL progress of scientific traditions, Popper proposes an original method that he calls “situational analysis”. This hermeneutical method seeks to understand the concepts, hypotheses, actions, practices, controversies and products that scientists made to solve problems in their specific historical contexts to improve the truth content of theories. In addition to his historical and hermeneutical turn, Popper also inquired about the social and political conditions for the progress of scientific traditions by means of intersubjective criticism of theories and conjectures. According to him, the RATIONAL discussion of ideas requires, as necessary conditions, plurality of ideas, intellectual humility, and freedom of thought and communication that can only exist in an open and democratic society. With these considerations, we may say that in addition to a historical and hermeneutical turn, Popper also contributed to a social and political turn in the philosophy of science

We are... So, to reframe the inquiry: who are we on a metaphysical level? Which aspects of ourselves are the most universally representative of who we are? How do we fare in the face of the passage of time? For decades, philosophers have debated the concept of diachronic personal identity, which focuses on the question of what keeps us alive. An intricate debate has developed between those who hold the body view (animalism) and those who hold the psychological view (memory) on the question of who we are. The two groups will eventually become so firmly set in their views that they will be unable to compromise. Hylomorphic animalism, or the view that humans are RATIONAL animals, living bodies made of prime matter and a RATIONAL soul, is an alternative answer to this divisive question that I propose in this study, following in the footsteps of Aristotle and Aquinas. We only survive if matter and RATIONAL souls do.

This article studies the community of scholars in the field of RATIONAL SCIENCES throughout the Seljuk’s era. The authors seek to answer questions regarding with the statistical development of the society of scholars in the Seljuk’s era, and the meaning and reasoning behind such historical trend. In order to respond those questions, the Seljuk’s era has been divided into three periods. The statistical society of each period taking into consideration and has been exhibited in different tables and charts. Analyzing the data of those tables and charts, it is concluded that the percentage of the scholars of RATIONAL SCIENCES in the Seljuk’s era not only had not been diminished, but also considerably increased throughout the second period despite the weaknesses of the central Government and also in the third period, despite having a destabilized and scattered governing system. Indeed, the overall numerical analysis shows an increasing historical development of the scholars and academics of RATIONAL SCIENCES in Seljuk’s era.

In 336 A.H., the Fatimid government of Egypt nominated the Kalbid family to Sicilian Islamic government. Sicilia (Islamic Saqliyah) was the largest islands of Mediterranean Sea which captured by Muslims in 8th/2nd century. The Aghlabids of North Africa took its Islamic Imarate for the first time. Kalbids government over it continued for almost a century. Their court was a favorite destination for Muslim Ulema and philosophers and Palermo (Islamic Blarm) enjoyed a brilliant economic and commercial growth among western Islamic centers. A look on Islamic sources which survived those days shows that, beside the current attention to some knowledge like Islamic jurisprudences, traditions and philology, there has been a noticeable accent on RATIONAL SCIENCES too. Among these, medicine, philosophy, theology, geometry, astronomy and mathematics are the most favorite ones. No doubt, this excellent growth of RATIONAL SCIENCES had its proportionate reasons which tolerant nature of Kalbid religious policy as well as their special favor to Muslim Ulema was the most important ones. There were also some Muslim Ulema and philosophers who conveyed the legacy of Sicilian school of Islamic SCIENCES to other parts of muslim world through migration and traveling.

The influential physicist Richard Feynman became interested in the relationship between religion and science during a mid-career phase. He proposed that their interface was embroiled in unresolvable difficulties. He felt that science demanded an attitude of uncertainty for its claims, while religion contrarily required certain belief in its core doctrines. Though possessing several non-contradictory dimensions, Feynman felt that the nature of the truth claims of science and religion suffered from insurmountable elemental conflicts. This was by contrast to Karl Popper, the leading critical RATIONAList of the 20th century, who argued that there could be no tension between science and religion. This paper will argue that the ‘Feynman Problem’ is not as insoluble as it appears. Rather, several solutions exist within critical RATIONALism. Two will be presented-the first revolves around the conjectural basis of knowledge and is already a well characterised critical RATIONAList notion. The second is a novel solution based on the separate categorisation of psychological, pragmatic, and epistemological attitudes to religion and science. Karl Popper’s view of religion-science dissimilarity was a minimalist point of departure for critical RATIONALists, who have developed increasingly sophisticated frameworks for investigating the relationship between faith and reason. Critical RATIONALism represents an equally inspiRATIONAL methodology for the pursuit of scientific and religious truth. Though both Feynman and Popper’s views on religion were underdeveloped, they foreshadowed the religion-science frameworks advocated by many late 20th century scientists, especially in the form of New Atheism and Gould’s NOMA theory.

Since Critical RATIONALism is considered by some more of an attitude or mindset and by others a methodological approach to philosophical thinking and practical problem-solving, its application, or more accurately, its epistemological testing grounds, should be expected to be much more wide-ranging than they have been so far. With the exception of some published anthologies on Critical RATIONALism and occasional nods to the legacy of Karl Popper’s falsificationist methodology, relatively few applicaions of a critical RATIONAL approach to contemporary theoretical debates in the social SCIENCES have been published. I wish here to critically challenge the (optimistic) Hegelian and by extension the neoliberal view of the progress of American capitalism by reframing it with the Marxian notion of expropriation as applied to enslavement on plantations. The logic of enslavement as a process by which brutal exploitation has been practiced for centuries offers a falsifying test case of the RATIONALity of capitalism and its promise of individual freedom of choice. This essay is an explicit exercise in the potential power of a version of Popperian critical RATIONALism being applied to the intersection of modern liberalism and capitalism, exploring the imbrication of a critical and RATIONAL analysis.