The focus of this study is primarily on “the discrepancy in mentality as an important factor affecting family problems and divorce”. For this purpose, some minor studies were conducted each of which experimentally examined different aspects of mental discrepancy in Iranian families. Almost all of these studies showed that permanent disputes and divorces resulted from the differences in their world-views, thinkings, and impressions in their mutual affairs. At last, the theory of Homogamy with two major revisions were used to explain the reasons and causes of family problems and divorce which were confirmed in minor studies and cases.

Resistance does not happen only through guns and bullets, but literature can also become a form of resistance. National literature can be seen as the representation of feelings, thoughts and ideas of a nation about its homeland. When this issue is accompanied by war, occupation, revolution, chaos, etc., it becomes more tragic and becomes one of the means of resistance against the enemy. Among the different types of literature in Palestine from the past until now, what has been more colorful than other types of literature are poetry, which shows that poetry has more depth than stories, plays, novels and other literary forms, and also has a great difference in terms of diversity with other forms. This article tries to investigate the emergence of Palestinian resistance literature by examining the contemporary history of Palestine and find out how social phenomena have caused the formation of Palestinian resistance literature. Literature that has played a serious role in the resistance of the people of this country. Based on this and considering the compatibility of Skinner's hermeneutic method with sociology of knowledge, both of which seek to establish a link between social and political context and time with concepts and ideas, Skinner's hermeneutic method has been used in this article.

The paper offers a distinctive reading of Popper’s work, suggesting that his Logic of Scientific Discovery (LScD) might be re-interpreted in the light of his Open Society. Indeed, Popper can be interpreted as criticising certain aspects of his first book, and as a result improving upon them, in his second. It suggests translating what Popper says about ‘conventions’ into his later vocabulary of ‘social institutions’. Looking back, I believe that Popper never intended the language of conventions and decisions to be read individualistically. I remain unsure whether Popper was himself quite as clear about this as he could have been.  My reading makes Popper a pioneer in the sociology of science. Scientific institutions are arenas of political power; but Popper did not discuss the structure and inter-relations of the social institutions of science, or offer a politics of science in the context of his methodology. What is missing from the skeletal sociology of LScD is the politics. We could put it in Popperian terms this way: scientific institutions are both open and closed. They are closed, firmly, to the inexpert, to the non-members; supposedly they are open to the qualified, provided the prerogatives of seniority and leadership are acknowledged. Despite these shortcomings, Popper’s critical and rational approach and his insistence on openness and intellectual honesty are still important today.

Based on Habermas theory of knowledge and human interests, the authors analyse the articles of Iranian journal of sociology from 1381 to 1384/volumms. The findings show that among 86 article: 59 article have adopted Naturwissenschaftenapproach, 25 article have Geisteswissenschaften and the rest of 2 have emancipatory approach. Although positivism is dominant on sociology of Iran, but there is a disturbance in theory and methodology and relationship between them. While the main aim of positivism is social engineering, Iranian positivism does not attention to it. In the Geisteswissenschaften, there is a great inconsistency in the of articles structures, for example, the presence of universal concept and rules together with the specific ones. Although the aim of this discipline is understanding social phenomena regarding to the cultural differences, but Iranian sociology has a little attention to it. Ultimately, wherase there are some epistemological problems in Iranian sociology, there is not different interest in it except personal interest.

The relationship between Historical sociology (HS) and International Relations (IR) is one of the relatively new fields of study, which has attracted the attention of researchers and activists of both fields during the last few decades. In other words, the impact of the international environment on internal developments is the basis for the emergence of this field of study with general titles such as International Historical sociology (IHS) or Historical sociology of International Relations (HSIR) during the first years or decade of the current century. The theoretical research on the book “Global Historical sociology” (GHS), raises the question of whether it is possible to know global historical sociology as a conjuncture point between the mentioned fields of study. The authors of the book criticized this tenet as a transdisciplinary branch that includes three areas: World sociology, Historical sociology, and World History. The studies carried out show that ambiguity in the possibility of methodological integration of the fields of sociology and history on the one hand and neglecting the position of the state in global transformations or its overlapping with the newly emerging field of Global Studies causes the current deficiencies in the content and methodological coherence of the book. However, the mentioned attitude can be more carefully considered and developed in the future. In this article, it will be tried to express the strengths and weaknesses of this work with a critical view.

This paper is a critical review of the book, The sociology of knowledge of Karl Mannheim, written by M. Ashtiani. The main aim of this attempt is to acquire a more acute understanding of the subject matter of sociology of knowledge and to emphasize the importance of this branch of general sociology in Iran. The specific goal of the paper is trying to have a critical review of Ashtiani’ s work to get help to achieve the main aim of this study. The present book includes five chapters: the first two chapters are specified to the scientific biography of Karl Mannheim and his life condition in Hungary, Germany and Britain. In the third chapter, the sphere of sociology of knowledge in view of Mannheim is described; and the two last chapters are about the main concepts and categories of Mannheim’ s sociology of knowledge, and finally, the critiques of Ashtiani to the main element of sociology of knowledge of Karl Mannheim.

The present study aims to study the sociology of knowledge in Gramsci's theories and its role in epistemological sociology and to analyse the part of Gramsci's ideas related to the sociology of knowledge. Considering that Gramsci and his theories are not related to the sociology of knowledge (that is, Gramsci has not deliberately discussed sociology of knowledge), the most important discussions of Gramsci's views related to the sociology of knowledge have been considered according to our context. The most important parts of Gramsci's ideas related to the sociology of knowledge investigate the influence of historical conditions as an awareness factor, the hegemony debate, dialectical theory, civil society, the emphasis on pragmatism of "will-mindedness", and the role of intellectuals, economic agents (infrastructure), and political factors (Workers' Council and etc. ). This study is a fundamental research which is based on content analysis qualitative methodology. The library method has been used to collect the data.