چکیده:
علوم انسانی اسلامی کارآمد، برای حل مسائل و معضلات عینی که عموما چندتباریاند، نمیتواند در تکرشتهها متوقف شود و نیازمند بهرهگیری از رویکرد میانرشتهای است. درحالی که میانرشتگی خود رویکرد نوینی در مغربزمین است و از ابهامات پارادایمی و فقر مبانی رنج میبرد، استفاده از این روش در پارادایمعلماسلامی، بدون توجه به لوازم و مبانی آن امکانپذیر نیست.این مقاله با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و با بهرهگیری از منابع کتابخانهای در سهگام نسبت میان میانرشتگی و پارادایمعلماسلامی را روشن میسازد که آیا این پارادایم، ظرفیت مطالعات میانرشتگی را دارد یا خیر؟ در گام اول ضمن بررسی نسبت میان سیستم و میانرشتگی، میکوشد اصلیترین مبانی معرفتشناختی، روششناختی و هستیشناختی میانرشتگی را استخراج و معرفی نماید. در گام بعدی، با عرضهی این مبانی به پارادایمعلماسلامی، استقبال این پارادایم از مبانی میانرشتگی روشن میشود. در گام سوم، نشان داده میشود که این پارادایم، بهگونهای این مبانی را ارتقا میدهد که میانرشتگی تعالییافتهای را هدف قرار میدهد و در حد میانرشتگی مرسوم متوقف نمیشود.
Introduction: Efficient Islamic humanities, in order to solve
objective problems and dilemmas that are generally multidisciplinary,
cannot be stopped in the disciplines and requires the use of an
interdisciplinary approach. While interdisciplinarity is a new approach
among Western scholars and suffers from paradigmatic ambiguities and
a lack of fundamentals, using this method in the paradigm of Islamic
science is not possible without considering its implications and
fundamentals. This article uses a descriptive and analytical method and
connection between the two. Therefore, interdisciplinarity and systemic
approach are two sides of the same coin. The subject of
interdisciplinary studies is always a "system"; especially complex
systems and not simple and linear. In fact, multidimensional subjects
can be modeled with complex systems. One of the main epistemological
foundations of the interdisciplinary approach is "coherence".
"Methodological multiplicity" is also the most important
methodological basis of the interdisciplinary approach. The ontological
foundations of interdisciplinary studies are also the "systematization" of
phenomena and their complexity.In the next step, by presenting and
comparing these principles to the paradigm of Islamic science, the
acceptance of this paradigm from the principles of interdisciplinary
becomes clear. The advanced epistemological system of this paradigm
does not negate coherence and efficiency and is not without them;
rather, in the context of foundational theory, it supports and
recommends them as secondary criteria. In methodological foundations,
the multiplicity of tools and consequently the multiplicity of methods
are accepted in this paradigm. This basis provides the basis for a
comprehensive study of the facts and his logical conclusion is that an
interdisciplinary approach should be used in cognition and study. Also,
the Islamic paradigm not only accepts systemic thinking based on the
systematization of phenomena and their complexity, but also expresses
this thinking about the whole system of existence as a macro system
and extends it to all other facts.
Conclusion: In the third step, it is shown that this paradigm
somehow enhances these principles that targets the "superior
interdisciplinary" and does not stop at the level of the common
interdisciplinary. The paradigm of Islamic science has not only
accepted the theoretical foundations of the interdisciplinary approach,
but has also mentioned them more comprehensively in its paradigmatic
foundations. Presenting "coherence" in the context of "matching
theory" implies closing the way to epistemic idealism in cognition. The
increasing complexity of the system of existence emphasizes the need
for a comprehensive study of facts.
uses library resources and tries to clarify the proximity and relation and
connection between interdisciplinarity and the paradigm of Islamic
science in three steps: Does this paradigm have the capacity, ability and
competence of interdisciplinary studies or not?
Method of Study: The method of discovery in this issue is biblical
and the method of evaluation is rational analythic.
Findings: In the first step, while examining the proportion and
relation between "System" and "Interdisciplinary", it tries to extract and
introduce the main epistemological, methodological and ontological
foundations of interdisciplinary. Understanding complex facts and
systems is only possible through interdisciplinary methods and in the
other hand Interdisciplinarity is itself a systemic approach to research.
There are many similarities between the systemic approach and the
interdisciplinary approach, which reinforces the two-way relation and