Jurisprudential Paradigms مقاله

خلاصه ماشینی:

The key point in defining a paradigm is its function as an identity-giving factor for a set of theories, rules, and propositions, which brings about numerous reflections and influences on the way of thinking, the mode of responding, and the nature and number of scientific questions and issues of each era. The central role of the paradigm in shaping and giving meaning to theories: Totality A paradigm clearly goes beyond other forms of totality in lower circles — such as the totality of theory or the totality of rules — and provides a space wider than any other domain or sphere. Each paradigm finds the opportunity to provide a set of theories within itself and to create the possibility for discussion and debate over a long period of time. This situation can be considered the first and perhaps one of the most important alignments of Shia and Sunni jurisprudence against each other; a situation whose study from various aspects helps us in a better understanding of the differences between two paradigms that have simultaneously formed among two different groups of audiences. However, since the dominant paradigm in this period had a stark difference from the period of the peak of the Usul paradigm, the literature, external form, and the space of the knowledge of Usul in the second century—like other parts of the jurisprudence of this century—were also influenced by and shaped by the dominant paradigm; a paradigm that in the Sunni tradition was formed around ijtihad (relying on opinion and analogy) and in the Shiite tradition around the negation of ijtihad (and emphasis on jurisprudential rules).