During the past two decades business and manufacturing have observed significant and radical changes. Companies have used automation in the manufacturing, in order to improve quality and competency. It was expected that along with these changes, management accounting systems, which focus on monitoring and analyzing management decisions, should adapt with and encourage the changes. Many authors have claimed that management accounting systems have not helped the suitable business and manufacturing strategies in the new environment. Some even claim that it has hindered investing in advanced manufacturing TECHNOLOGY and productivity.This research, by analyzing information collected from 101 Iranian business units from various industries and manufacturing settings, investigates JUSTIFICATION basis for capital investment in advanced manufacturing TECHNOLOGY. The study demonstrates that there is more correlation between qualitative factors such as; manufacturing capabilities, improved product quality and, competition position with investment JUSTIFICATION than quantitative bases such as; accounting rate of return (ARR), internal rate of return (IRR) and, net present value (NPV).

Introduction: From a long time ago, benefiting from TECHNOLOGY has been an inevitable thing for human interests, which is born and based on science. It can be claimed that there is harmony between ethics, science and TECHNOLOGY, which promote each other. In this article, the researcher discusses this harmony and compatibility. Material and Methods: The current review study was descriptive and using the study of sources and research keywords among the books and articles published in the databases of Thomson Information Institute, Science Direct and Pub Med. Conclusion: As science and TECHNOLOGY continue to advance and become more integrated into our daily lives, ethical considerations become increasingly important. For example, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has raised questions about the potential implications of creating machines that can make autonomous decisions and take actions. If science and TECHNOLOGY were considered as a tool, it should have been able to subjugate humans and influence all aspects of behavior and values. While it has become a problem that eventually becomes aligned with morality by applying reason, and people now seek help from it as a tool.

Today, in many industrial sectors, TECHNOLOGY has made significant progress. Investing in advanced manufacturing technologies, especially in computer-integrated manufacturing systems, is essential in order to survive in a competitive environment, improve performance, respond to demand fluctuations, and increase customer satisfaction. With available technologies and systems in computer integrated manufacturing (CIM) and its related technologies, the application of CIM in manufacturing enterprises is a reality and can meet the need of complicated manufacturing environment. Implementation of these systems brings many tangible and intangible benefits. However, according to several factors that must be considered in the evaluation process, JUSTIFICATION of these systems is complex and difficult. The traditional JUSTIFICATION methods, such as net present value (NPV) and return on investment (ROI) for the evaluation of these systems, are not sufficient; the substantial benefits of advanced manufacturing technologies, such as quality and flexibility, go undetected with these methods. Yet, the JUSTIFICATION of investment in these systems is one of the many challenges facing managers in the manufacturing industries today. In this paper, the existing approaches to assessment and JUSTIFICATION of advanced manufacturing technologies are reviewed. Using axiomatic design theory as a tool for the systematic design, a comprehensive framework to justify the investment is provided. Taking into account the economic and strategic considerations, this framework encompasses the important aspects required for a complex decision-making and analysis. Also, it is shown that using a four-step procedure, intangible benefits can be made tangible. Finally, based on the proposed framework, a case study considered and the decision to implement advanced manufacturing TECHNOLOGY has been evaluated. The paper lists intangible benefits that are important in ERP projects and demonstrates economic and strategic JUSTIFICATION of this system. At the strategic level, analytic hierarchy process and The Expert choice 11 were used as tools for project evaluation, followed by the economic analysis required for JUSTIFICATION.

Within the linguistic paradigm, there is a problem that was always connected with coherence conceptions of truth: how we may, in light of the evidence available to us, raise an unconditional truth claim that aims beyond what is justified. In other words, within the linguistic paradigm, if the truth of a proposition can no longer be conceived as correspondence with something in the world, then how truth is to be distinguished from JUSTIFICATION. In responding to this question, there are two major doctrines. On the one hand, from the pragmatic radicalization of the linguistic turn Richard Rorty obtains a nonrealist understanding of knowledge and assimilates truth to JUSTIFICATION. For Rorty, because there is nothing apart from JUSTIFICATION, and because there is no way to get outside our beliefs and our language so as to find some test other than coherence, the concept of truth is superfluous. On the other hand, others, including Jurgen Habermas, attempt to take account of realist intuitions. For Habermas, there is internal connection between JUSTIFICATION and truth, and a JUSTIFICATION successful in our justificatory context points in favor of the context –independent truth of the justified belief. To account for internal relation between JUSTIFICATION and truth, Habermas only appeals to the interaction between actions and discourses. Only the entwining of the two different pragmatic roles played by the concept of truth in action contexts and in rational discourses can why a successful JUSTIFICATION of a belief according to our standards points in favor of the truth of that belief.

It does not seem unlikely the permissibility of suicide in cases of mutual trouble-that has the more important criteria-and also where one is distressed and is suffering from a terminal disease, since the verses and traditions indicating the illegality of suicide are either unrelated to these cases and/or the subject of the reasons for emergency and the emergency rule includes these cases contrary to the majority opinion and the reason and traditions of the learned do not denounce the suicide.

Muslim philosophers have divided conceptual knowledge into two distinct categories: self- evident and non self - evident.The latter is proved by the former. But Muslim thinkers in justifying the self-evident propositions have different logical and analytical approaches. This paper deals with these approaches and attempts to show the place of self-evident propositions in the structure of deductive sciences.

Epistemological JUSTIFICATION is one of the parts of tripartite definition (analysis) of knowledge. due to this defination "true belief" is knowledge, if it is justified. JUSTIFICATION theories, due to epistemologist's views on relation of belief to free will, are divided into two groups: deontologism and non- deontologism. Deontologism results to evidentialism and internalism and the result of non- deontologism is externalism. Internalism results to foundationalism and coherentism and the subsequent of externalism is reliabilism and naturalism. In this essay we consider the relation of belief to free will, volitionalism and non- volitionalism and then see how the different theories of JUSTIFICATION are formed from the two theories mentioned and then, due to theses, classify the JUSTIFICATION theories.