The Hegemony of the West and fragmentation of knowledge production

Abstract
The knowledge of international relationship in terms of earlier history has two features ; from one direction, the history of this scientific field is not got to one century and from another direction , in the era of theorizing and principals it is indebted to thoughts and political philosophe especially west tradition and Greece. Despite of rich thinking and political background before Iranian theorists and the Muslims that of course, is considerably the product of interactions and thinking currents, philosophical, Islamic and the Greece. The current of thinking and theorizing in field of international relationship in Iranian -Islamic school is at least incomplete. Hence, this valuable and rich treasure in its regain in the theoretical field of international relationship has usually been unsuccessful and couldn’t have shown itself in the area of international relation and to be as the guide of researches and scholars of this field of study however, the following article by a critical approach regarding hegemony of the west in this domain, is looking for new pattern in this arena.
Key words: International relations, theorizing, control theory, political thought, Islam, Iran
The flow of international relationship, generally, in all of non-western regions and especially in Iran is on a shaking column and needs more attention and care of politicians as well as scholars of this field. This situation lasts so far as up to now any specific recitation regarding Iranian- Islamic discourses has not been offered and whatever has been researched is a collection stemmed from common custom in this domain however, we must claim that whatever has been suggested up to know and what investigated, has been using of Western resources which this current, in the first step, is incomplete, in the second step unbelievable and the third one lacks critical feature. The collection of the above factors have caused the authors to achieve this belief that whatever is known in Iran as international relationship has been more affected by thinking and cultural context of the West and less the others have judged about this domain. Some theories such as Western hegemonic theories of international relationship in Iran, lack of negotiations and circular discussions among scientists, the Conservative researchers, lack of relationship between researchers and politicians, lack of effective communication with international scientific community and the cases like this are the reasons such as lack of production or nativity of international relationship in Iran. Anyway, it sounds that today shaping serious issues in the field of domesticating the sciences, especially humanistic, has improved this issue that even though, the issue of thinking and theorizing in this field in the West at the beginning of 20 century and after that due to the dominance on domain of science, prevented emergence and appearing of other discourses of the rivals but, it seems that , by an overall and comprehensive effort and of course inter- subject Islamic –Iranian discourses , this phenomenon suggested the issue of international relationship. The present paper is going to answer to this question that “what have been the reasons of lack of an Islamic-Iranian theory in international relationship in later years?
A flow in theoretical study of international relationship:
Regarding the quality of study and theorizing in the course of international. Regarding the quality of study and theorizing regarding the flow of international relationship there is no consensus although provision of this process is up to high level back to occurrence of World War 1&2, its main consequences are because of different events that increasingly added to its complexity at late first world war. Prominent figures called for the establishment of academic studies in the field of international relations but, despite these efforts, the formation of international relations as a completely independent discipline, separate and coherent in the period after World War II in the years between these two World Wars the way for this studding issue was paved. But, these attempts in that period, primarily in the context of disciplines such as political science, history and the history of diplomacy were existed. World War II, the studies of international relations in the form of thoughts and political thinking and also analysis of international events on the basis of newspaper investigations and history writing was made and usually did not have a continuous order and stability. Accordingly, the field of international relations arena on a time has been a place for historians, journalists and sometimes lawyers and scholar and sometimes has been in the realm of ethics and its leaders as well. The arena of International relations have been mainly provider of guidelines to policymakers, which as example we can point to the works of people like Mencius, one of the prime ministers of Chandra Koupta and Indian empire. Some experts who were affected by political science scholars and lawyers believe that elements of the theory in international relations can be found in works of lawyers such as Grvsyvs and researchers such as Machiavelli, Rousseau or notes of politicians such as Bismarck however, the group who also define international relations based on relations between national units attributes the field of study the world of Westphalia. In the meantime, Gutzyny believes that among the theorists of international relations the realistic theorists had the largest share in shaping the international field as an academic discipline and academic major and the penetration of realists were in the realm of American social science.
Theoretical debates on international relations:
The studding process in international relations represents a sort of move away from materialism to spiritual orientation it means if the traditional theories of international relations such as realism and liberalism had more emphasized on the material aspects of their material dimension but, the formation of the debates within the field of international relations , especially from the 1980s onwards and posing English school and constructivist theories is reflecting the emergence of a kind of spiritual orientation in the literature of this field. Therefore, it must be acknowledged that the sets of differences in theorizing field of international relations cause numerous and variety of debates in this scientific field to the extent that some thinkers such as Karl Deutsch, divided these debates into four waves nevertheless, in the first wave, this field for a long time was the exclusive arena of international lawyers. The second wave came in after these two things ; one was unfolding of the history of diplomacy after the opening of many public archives after World War I , and the other was tendency towards international organizations in the wake of experiencing of the Leagues of Nations. In the third wave, the researchers began to adapt a number of suitable methods and findings of other social and behavioral sciences, especially psychology, social anthropology and sociology thus; the fourth wave which was reinforced after the end of World War II and is still continuing has tried to apply concepts related to analytical, quantitative research and comparative one. In this wave, through the adoption of economics, math, science, systems analysis and even abnormally from the knowledge of behavior the outstanding rule –mongering has been conducted. On the other hand, we can study the theories of international relations in terms of method and content in the form of four debates as follow: They know the first debate between idealists and realists that it is said that this debate have more had ontological dimension however, in this debate, the fundamental difference was in the nature of international political system as well as behavioral incentives of the government. Idealists believed that by creation of an international institutional means and avoidance of secret diplomacy and replacement of public participation in foreign policy , one can achieve international peace and security . In contrast, the realists emphasized on the perpetual power struggle, the impossibility of eradicating war in international life and conflict of the states’ interests. In a priding way, this debate was mostly confined to designated areas or topics of international relations and ended by a practical failure of idealists’ views on institutional arrangements after World War I and World War II. The second debate conducted in the 1950s and 1960s and what we witnessed in second debate in some dimensions had epistemological and in some methodological aspects and it was conflict between the two groups on the one hand, the behaviorists who emphasized on systematic effort to find a political patterns by developing empirical theory and technical analysis Pursuit of knowledge through the collection of observable data , organize the data through the empirical testing of hypotheses and assumptions regarded , on the other hand, Traditionalists ( idealists and realists ) who by reliance on history , philosophy , personal experience and illumination emphasized on lack of realistic possibility of using quantitatively techniques of experimental science in the field of international relations In fact , with growth and the development of scientific methods in social studies and also overcoming of behaviorist revolution against what was known as international relation was accounted as behaviorism in international relations. Fans of scientism or behaviorism in international relations, emphasized that traditional notions of the traditional realists and idealists by interlacing existential topics, normative or prescriptive aspects of the theories, lack of attention to the application of scientific methods in gathering and analyzing of the data , lack of attention to the level of data analysis , selective approach with historical data and excessive reliance on history , philosophy and investigating of quantity and using of history can make “international relation as scientific as other domains of recognition and acknowledgement. In contrast, the traditionalists were aimed that the adoption of scientific methods will not add anything to our knowledge of international relations and even this kind of Scientism is not anything but exemplary back to romanticism in a justified cover as science however, in the outcome of the second debate, the incomplete dominance of behavioristic methods and proving-oriented researches was in international relations. In the third debate, the time length and the main parties involved in it, there is little consensus between them however, Some consider third debate between behaviorism and post behaviorism and believe that since the late 1960s by clarifying the limits of the scientific approach, the tendency to use both traditional and scientific approaches to the differentiation of subject and the particular conditions in the form of behaviorism was formed facing behaviorism. Some consider about the debate between realists or all the tradition of “state –centered” approach or the approach of interdependence or transnationalism multiplicity approach by its emphasis on actors and non-state actors. Michael Banks, considers this debate between three paradigm mentioned above and on the other side, Weaver considers it among the three paradigms of realist , liberal and radical views from this perspective , the third debate is regarded to determining this issue that if realist paradigm to rival and alternative ones are sufficient or not . Here it is stressed that, unlike the second debate that both sides had the same fundamental assumptions about the international system however, in the third debate on the structure and nature of these assumptions , the main actors are domestic and international policies that have been disputed and to this reason, it is accounted more important than all debates. In another version of the third debate, this time the main argument is among the neo- Islamists and post orientalists - including critical theory , sociology , historical sociology , neo-realism and feminist however, the commonality of the Critics is also tend to manifest common political agenda of the so- called scientific neo-realists. This debate has more meta-theoretical nature and is based on the basis of ontological and epistemological of international relations. Therefore, it is one of the axes of the distinction between those who consider recognition taken from social construction. Another focus of current debates in international relations, are the possibility or impossibility of the scientific study of international relations however, on another side of the debate, there is mainstream with a type of scientism (more or less adjusted) , which is based on the assumption of the possibility of objective recognition , the separation of subject and object , the separation of fact and value , the possibility of achieving the truth and getting firmed foundations and in other word is a fundamentalism. The possibility of recognition and finding a basis for judgment on the claims to truth or they are true and reject the separation of subject and object and they also believe that there is nothing but, the regimes of reality Which legitimates the claims of suppress special cases in the specific contexts of time and place and defeat the rest of the claims of truth or marginalize them in fact, this group does not accept any oriental reality. From this perspective, no one can offer a rational explanation for social status and should appeal to the current understanding of language however, experimental data are not but, an interpretation and other interpretations and readings can challenge them. The fans of scientism or positivists argue that since there is not possibility of scientific and experimental study and quantification of phenomena such as ideas , concepts and so on, there is no need to study international relations to what is scientifically and experimentally possible to study such as ( constructions, behaviors, material power and …). In contrast, many of those who believe in the importance of issues of meaning and mentality, to rule out the possibility of scientism and naturalism in the social sciences, believing that one must use specific methods to study human affairs which by using expressions such as elaboration, interpretation and so on can be pointed to. If in the first view, it is epistemology which forms to ontology from the second view, it is epistemology which determines ontology however, these groups which are sometimes described as constructivist or post-structuralist radical, believe that our understanding is severely having restrictions. In fact, they are called the anti- oriented infrastructure that are not attributed to any criterion, evaluative tool to assess recognition and truth claims however, They criticize the wholeness and monotony that scientists trying clones to impose on their world and consider them as “ illusion of control”. They seek to uncover (the fight against) the exercise of power and control, marginalizing, oppression, imposing identities and etc. The separation does not accept fact and value and believing that the observer can never be separated from the actor thus, Weaver Accordingly says “we must distinguish between the third debate and latest discourses. The fourth debate has a philosophical nature and one can from the one hand consider rationalists - including neo- fundamentalists and neo-liberals - who have more or less a science -oriented outlook and also consider actors as knowledgeable as critical theorists. And from other side, the re-thinkers of Poststructuralist and feminist - that emphasizing the sociability of facts and the role of meaning, discourse, language and human procedures and often with a critical approach to knowledge and modern science, can be considered. According to Weaver, the relationship between perceptions of the two groups of incommensurability (which was indicative of the paradigm debate between ) has got to war thus, as mentioned above , we are faced with a string that actually multiplicity of theoretical perspectives has turned into the feature of its describer but, what is very important at this time and noticing it is essential, is Considering the fact that each of the views and mentioned debates had a background of political and philosophical relations in area of international relations that have played a prominent role in shaping to these views For example , the ideas of people like Kant and Batyz can be considered important in shaping the ideas of liberalism , or named the impact of the views of Hobbes and Machiavelli in designating the theories of realism; even one can even mention the impact of people like Habermas ,Horkheimer and Marcuse in suggesting the theories of Frankfurt School or the impact of Hegel and Nietzsche 's ideas in shaping theories of postmodernism can be considered important. According to the above examples, it can be understood that political views and ideas of different thinkers has been influential in shaping ontology and epistemology of theories of international relations. The importance of this issue is more glaring when we reviews the history of philosophical and political ideas in Islam it is because, in Islam, the resources available, indicate the countless existence of theories in the arena of philosophical and political fields that out of which we can point to the ideas of individuals like Mavardi, Ghazali , Farabi , Ibn Khaldun that each of them have left countless contents up to know. Despite this valuable and precious scrip up to date no acceptable interest and considerable value in theorizing in Irani - Islamic has not been happened in international relationships however, the aim of the following paper is to uncover this curtains that West wing tendencies in the area of international relations has not been meant the inability of other cultures to express their own interpretations of international relations and is not. Then, by examining the hegemony of the West’s approach to science, we will explain how this process explained. One of the issues affected the theoretical debates in recent years in the field of international relations is talking about the significance, feasibility and desirability of non-Western theorizing in this area. According to the traditional view of science, the science is regarded as objective recognition is considered which has an aspect of universality as well as even more and less has timeless and roaming aspect. From this perspective, the theory is also accounted as memorial exercise that, finally, empirical evidence and facts, will be the criterion of judge regarding them as a result , there is an ideal theory and final rule in each department that can best explain the reality in that field. A Look at the current situation of international relations in the late 1990s shows that no theory in international relations has a dominant position to be a result of its acceptance and more or less its universality therefore, on the one hand , in the mainstream of rationalism we witness continuation of two main views of neo-realists and neo-liberalism. The Neo-liberal and neo- oriented debate concerning relative and absolute gains is still more or less suggestive however, it has been converted from a theoretical issue to an empirical one. On the other hand, the mainstream opposition continues to its life and, in this critical current, the relative continuity of criticism is observed contrary to main the movement at the same time, the debates within the critical flow and also along with attempts to adhere the views together are formed in addition, unlike 1990s, now the more attention of critical flows are focused on the problems in international relations and not theoretical and philosophical arguments term. In general, we can consider the theoretical multiplicity and meta-theoretical multiplicity as the characteristic of features- oriented of international relations since the end of 1990 which its characteristics include: Unresolved problems of philosophy and philosophy of science , (2) failure in integration or convergence among approaches ; 3. The tendency to starting from philosophical issues ; 4. more attention to problems of international relations and thus the result means the necessity of accepting the coexistence of attitudes and acceptance of situation of diversity and trying to find possible ways of coexistent issue and multiplicity of viewpoints . In the meantime, in recent years, the West’s oriented string of international relations has been criticized and in parallel to it, attention to the theory of non- American and beyond that non-Western has been drawn. At the moment, the collection of knowledge of international relations has five elements of Identitism of post-colonialism, Islamic universalism - Iranian, American pragmatism, Asian solidarity and European pacifism but, effort and practical success to develop local knowledge and making local theories is undoubtedly related to the fields of discourse, institutional, cultural, social and political theories in any society where the potential and practical ones are produced. Since the purpose of this article is seeking the quality of non- Arabic theories, first, we examine theoretical reasons of this issue from the viewpoints of critical views and postmodernism and then, it is pointed to Islam’s political thoughts which can be influential in line with Islamic-Iranian theories in international relationships.
Western knowledge and the dominance perspective:
Western knowledge and world domination is a product of Europe expansion however, the West’s knowledge of itself, was achieved through the categories and assumptions that were based on its own axis and was fundamentally different with categories and assumptions which formed another recognition. The branches of social science that came out by incentive of culture recognition and non-Western people which are based on the categories and forms of analysis that basically and specifically were designed to understand the others however, the primary ethnology emerged to recognize non-Western cultures So, the far prospects latent in this orientation is quickly reveals that how values formed in the established scholarship can produce the judgments and cultural contrast between himself and the other so as to be the justifier of non-Westerns’ operations in non-western world. Accordingly, Sharabi speaks of Husserl who insists that only the European man has the rights and advantage if philosophizing and rated and non-western cultures, primitive are pre- knowledge and incapable for philosophical reflection. Husserl assumption was that the European perspective has the priority and superiority of quality and this issue is necessarily intended to a kind of generalization and universalism. Regarding the field of international relations and theorizing in this domain, we must say that since 1980s onward special attention and serious studies has been carried out regarding knowledge while it was something else before that. With the advent of critical theory and postmodernism and posing questions about science, the silence was broken and also, the reply and meta-physical suppositions which guided knowledge and framed it turned into fundamental aspects of international relations Since 1988, as Dardariyan says the international underwent epistemological critique that the language, concepts, methods and history shaping and guiding intellectual tradition were questioned. Instead of epistemological and cosmological issues (principles or something) is assumed to be correct, but now, it looks that this field has changed substance on this issue that how one can consider these issues in other intellectual traditions of competitor. Critical theories and post-modern, in contrast to empiricism , believe in the importance of knowledge ideas in representation of ideology in basing for political and social realities but, facing the abstract philosophical idealism , this theory asserts that knowledge territory has formed dominant power relations and partly served it. One of the view points of Foucault is replacement of knowledge production and truth at the center of political and social analysis and separation of the knowledge generation from power production in short, between the techniques of knowledge and the strategies of power and ardor there is no separation nevertheless, Foucault has called this rule as immanence ones. According to this rule, there is a strong public combination of modes among the methods of interpretation and operation of power and they mutually support each other thus, our task is to see how power operations with larger bodies of modern world has been matched and adapted. Which one of the dominant forms of knowledge and power derived from that imitated and has taken its legitimatization from it? How knowledge help forming “dominant mentality forms” and backgrounds of knowledge implication. These are questions that allow scrutiny of the relationship between power - knowledge to create so, Foucault's view is that a units process of a peace or psychological- judicial steps from one hand and human’s knowledge from another is under the basement of prison history in other word, prison means to strengthen of modern community as well as modern methods of understanding the world. In the literature of postmodern, the issue has been looked at from genealogy view points however; genealogy from a simple way of speech is a historical thinking that identifies the significance of power relations. Genealogy is a form of history that makes historical those things that can be thought beyond history, including those things or ideas hided in writing and the history or excluded from care. In one sense “ writing anti histories” is related which clarifies that what makes possible history as a unified and clear narrative with beginning , middle and end how create the processes of putting away and covering affairs. From genealogical perspective, human history does not testify the gradual revelation of truth and meaning but, is also the scene of frequent and endless game and scenes. History as a set of domination, coercion and deception in knowledge and power is moving and genealogist’s task is to split the date the so that it can uncover a variety of trajectories to make mentalities, objectivities, practical background and territories of raised knowledge or blocked. Apart from this, is genealogy objectivism which denies the ability and capacity of understanding the origins and meanings of historical objectivity? Genealogical approach has anti- essentialist tendency and agree that any knowledge is formed in a particular time and place and has derived from a particular perspective nevertheless the s of knowledge is shaped by a political and historical context , was bred and bound up so that it plays its role with specific concepts, classes and categories of knowledge ,hence, knowledge is never unconditional and the result of lack of heterogeneity in terms of conditions and needed background is that we can not have a single perspective and Archimedean to defeat other views hence, There is no truth but, competing perspectives and “regimes of reality” Foucault, says that how the beliefs stemmed from dignity and position of reality forms the performance and social units. This type of investigation and noticing to the position of reality is obviously distinct from searching reality and emphasizes that how the regimes of reality only by replacement of superior regimes are being subdued. There are fights and battles among and inside regimes of reality by which the dynasty of phenomenon has appeared and some rules is imposed on bases of knowledge. Post-modernism has investigated the ways in which one perspective or view establishes an agency and by marginalizing other views achieves dominance and legitimation. International Relations as a discipline knowledge is not safe in many conflicts around the regimes of truth so, International relations as the scene of battle between the competing agencies has remained where some have superiority over the other. The purpose of postmodernism is not to achieve accurate representation of international relations, but also to reach a critical examination of how particular representations has streamed and succeed to produce scientific- political effects. In the genealogical method , Steve Smith ( 6 ) reminds us that the strings are fields of fight between rivalry interpretations however, there is a” picture of self” in the string of international relationship but, this picture of his own only by putting replacements away maintained dominance and has covered power conflicts which places a mentality as the picture of its own. There is no a unique picture of its own but, in a string, there are rival pictures of its own. From gemology view point, International theory rather than to be a natural self- discipline and a clear set of open fields, which is closer to describing reality is historical expression of a set of conflicting interpretations that unity and identity is the product of ( interpretation ) difference between International relations and other disciplines depends to suppress internal differences. Another concept used in this article is the concept of “foundation breaking”. Deconstructing is a general style that basically breaks what stabilizes the concepts and conceptual contradictions. The main point of deconstruction is that the effects and generated costs by the harmony of opposites is being determined so as the parasitic relationship between contradictory terms is not blocked and to be tried to move and replacing them. According to Derrida, conceptual contradictions are never clearly neutral but, inevitably are based on dynasty. This privileged expression reasons on presence, superiority, being pure or identity which the other lacks. In short, deconstruction also deals with the establishment and the destruction of any comprehensive whole whether it is a text or theory of discourse structure, foundation or an organ so; Derrida wants to show this relation of fixed effects and making of instability through two readings in each analysis the first reading, is a review on the dominant interpretation or the real regime that shows how a text, discourse or institution achieves fixed effects. This reading is repetition or sincere imitation of dominant narrative through its fundamental assumptions, repeat doing the process of conventional stages in that discussion. The point here is to be determined that how a text, discourse or institution is becoming coherent, understandable, consistent and constant. The Second reading by mutual recalling readings and with an emphasis on variable points within a text, discourse or institution destroys it. The Second reading shows the internal roles of the first reading and how inadequately and incompletely these tensions are covered up. In total, five theories to explain the dominance of Western international relations are mentioned which are as follows: The Western theories of international relations, have found the right way of understanding international relations.
- Western theories of international relations have been overcome the words of Gramsci.
- Non theories of international relations truly exist but are invisible from eyes.
- Local conditions, prevents the production of non-Western theories of international relations.
- West has much earlier stepped in this way and non-Western world are compensating it’s fallen behind.
As inferred from the above discussion, at some point in history and mainly the modern era, a particular interpretation of all natural phenomena and social - human as modern science has appeared which has characteristics such as to be timeless and placeless that relies on direct observation of the West -oriented and extensible and gradually with rejection and exclusion of other unique impressions has had undisputed claim, dominance and control of resources But, by shattered the theoretical foundations and basic assumptions of modern positivism and critical theory in general plan , other areas of intellectual and geographic scope did not have an opportunity to exercise. Meanwhile, in the field of international relations, for a while different views have been expressed but, what the authors of this paper has emphasized on This is done by deliberation stemming principles and frameworks of different theories of international relations , we can see that these areas are particularly indebted to other areas of science and thought and political philosophy. As elsewhere in this paper also was discussed the theories of realism, liberal, critical, postmodern, School of English Constructivism and even feminism of international relations are deeply indebted to the efforts of political thinkers such as Hobbes and Machiavelli, Kant and Jeremy Bentham Batyz, the Frankfurt School, Nietzsche, Foucault and Derrida and Lyotard, Grvsyvs, Anthony Giddens and Bhaskar on Vjsvp and etc. In fact, thinking production of these scholars over the pass centuries became a means that in the twentieth century and after the establishment of the academic field of international relations from 1919 onwards, various theories of international relations take form. By reflection and ponder over the trend and thinking policy in Islam, one can observe a valuable scrip of political ideas in this school but, what prevents the reproduction of these ideas from the field of political thinking in the field of international relations, in addition to the long backwardness of Muslim societies, it relates to the thinking, theoretical and practical hegemony of Western area or modernity which can be useful in the theory of international relations.
Islam’s political thought:
If we can provide definitions for various science researching fields such as political jurisprudence or political word of Islamic gave a speech, it will be difficult about the concept of Islamic political thought. Because, in Islamic political studies, it is unlikely that one can describe a series of political thought as a course and scientific background or specific method However, these studies can be assumed public and inclusive which oversees all scientific disciplines and fields. Ayatollah Amid Zanjani for concepts of political thought, political theory and political theory, assumes transposition and postpone and creates connection and logical attachment. He likened the situation with engineering so, he considers political thought as the design of construction maps, political theory as a foundation and infrastructure, and political theory as a method and device of operations. He likened the situation with engineering, political thought as the design and construction maps, political theory as a foundation and infrastructure, and political theory as a method and device operations as it considers. He likened the situation with engineering, political thought as the design and construction maps, political theory as a foundation and infrastructure, and political theory as a method and device operations as it considers. Amid Zanjani has a new and innovative comment but, does not give us some criteria which we account which category of issues as political thought which as political theory. Some of definitions have tried to provide accurate parameters and determine boundaries, the content and specific ways for that. Based on the definition of Raymond Aron, political thought is the attempt to define the objectives to be achieved possibly reasonably and also determining the means that can be reasonably expected and leading to achieve those goals. According to doctor Bashiriyeh , political thought has more practical nature and more abstract tendencies of political philosophy and issues such as reasons ,necessity and the principles of government is not seen in it. Based on the above approach, political thought, however, may be somewhat descriptive or explanatory but, is essentially normative, that is, deals with how to organize political life based on particular moral theory or moral. Political thought is morally concerned with the humanitarian situation and in this regard is close to political ideology therefore, political thought unlike, political theory and not reward but, call generalizability as the subject of its study and tries to determine outspread phenomenon in this way that as if necessarily , there are body like relation between them. Although political thought it may be ideological in some cases, is continually focused on understanding and recognition. Leo Strauss has another outlook different, he, by making differentiation between political theory and political philosophy, consider both as part of a political idea. In his opinion, political thought is a reflection on their political ideas or providing an interpretation of them and the purpose of political ideas is imagination, concept, or anything else to think about it the mind is implemented and related political principles. Therefore, political thought is a general concept that any thinking on the subject of politics - whether consciously or unconsciously, and unpolished - is included. Political Thought as a part of human thought network, in his effort to define, clarify and elaborate their relations with the outside world, has always been associated with human social life nevertheless, the aim of political thought, not only is discovering the truth of politics but, a practical effort to find ways to increase efficiency has been and setting better management of the city. Rajai’s definition by reference to definition of one of the experts our country , call that part of the political thinking as political thought that in the discourse of a civilization deals with ordering and tries questions that facilitates the comprehend and receiving delicacies . However, we should distinguish between the concept of Islamic political thought and political thought in Islam and based on this we can provide definitions below. Islamic political thought, means any comprehensive normative any discussion related to power and rule of the Quran and documentary tradition, but political thought in Islam defined as any discussion concerning the Muslims’ discourses which is related to the power , government and documented to Quran. In other words, Islam’s political thought is doing Quran’s political discussion and tradition with the view of problem solving in the practical aspects of Islamic Political discussions and also doing debates of writers who have proposed political discourses of Islam in different ways. In the latest concept, the word of universe before Islam has been removed and its origin is political thought in the Muslim world and synonymous with it is the Muslim’s political thought however, regarding what to say up to know, we can discuss some points:
The most important feature of research methodology of Islamic political thought is documentation to the Quran and tradition and the researches of Islamic political thought are the fundamental issues that to answer the main question of research documents back to Quran and tradition or directly to political issues of Quran and tradition: Based on this, firstly the investigations in them documentation to Koran and tradition has incidental and marginal aspect, are not accounted as part of Islamic political thought secondly, Secondly , if a non-Muslim person in response to the main question of investigation or directly tries to follow political debates of Quran and tradition , his discussions will be accounted as part of Islamic political thought.
The most important feature of the methodological issues of political thought in Islam is that discusses the views , ideas , thinkers and Muslim writers who, directly have paid attention to response to main question of political debate in Quran and tradition. Based on this, , firstly , non-Muslims who have studied political discussions of Quran and tradition are excluded from the circle of these researches but, the researcher of non-Muslim thought in Islam can be non- Muslim. Secondly, all political debates of Muslim thinkers ranging from political jurisprudence, political theology, philosophy, and Islam’s political are considered as the subject of Islamic political thought in Islam.
The indices of political thought in Islam:
We can consider the indices of Political thoughts in Islam as follow:
1. Subject;
Topics and issues of politics and government in the idea of Muslim scholars is doing Political Thought in domain of politics which as been discussed by Muslim thinkers from the beginning up to now because, these issues in the domain of
2. Goal :
Investigation, recognition, analysis, critique and using of the views of Muslim scholars in political debates:
3- addressee: the researchers and political scholars , governors and managers , lawmakers and political and social activists.
4- Types of discussion: inner –religion, related to scholars’ discourses and community in the discussing period .
Resource:
all the works of discussing scholars
6- Types of questions: The curious Questions to understand the ideas and political views of Muslim scholars regarding the above explanations , at the following , we will point to political thought in Islam and especially the ideas of Shiite and then, we also propose the modern theories of international relations.
Approach, the historical evolution of political thought in Islam
The dynamics of Islamic political thought is out of the obvious feature of this school in the analysis of global changes and confronting with challenges of social life of the Muslims however, we must search the basic foundation of this dynamics as ijtihad. The element of Ijtehad, in the process of its development in the field of political knowledge, has created four distinct periods for the history of the changes of political thoughts of Islam, especially Shia. As we will see below, the reality of political implications, are under the influence of theology, jurisprudence, philosophy, ethics and other branches of wisdom.
The First period: The period of supreme political talks
During this period, most political considerations, are based on the concepts of theology such as fundamental issues of Speakers about the caliphate , Imamate , the province , justice , determination , freedom , wisdom , good and evil , inherent beauty and ugliness, stable rules of social developments and etc. Therefore, in such locations the nature of political powers in theology and politics is discussed and politics is outlined along with religion principles.
Second period: the development of political thoughts in philosophy
The beginning of this period nearly begins from the major absence of Imam Mahdi (RA) nevertheless, by beginning of this period, the theological aspects of this policy, due to injuries imposed on the Shiites and oppressive massacres of Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs, loses its effects and the absence of Imam from the objectivity of community also helps to this tragic separation and politics is completely deviated from the axis of theological discourses which was based on three basis of spiritual , wisdom and narration and is entangled in the trap of wisdom. Muslims’ familiarity with Greek philosophy, especially the methodology of two great philosopher , Plato and Aristotle , in the philosophical foundations have had a strong influence on the development of political thought. The Muslim philosophers, by using the principles of rational and philosophical traditions, and offering utopias in the field of practical wisdom are being determined. The rise of great figures such as al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, Tusi and other Shiite scholars and their ideas are manifestations of philosophical aspects of politics in this period. And the books of the ideas of Al-Madina ,Alfazlh , the book of Al Siasat Al Madina” of Abu Nasr al-Farabi the part of politic books of Tusi ideas from, the book of Naseri temperament are visual manifestations of politics based on philosophical basis. This period begins near 400 AH (Hejri ) and lasts until 600 . In this period, political thought considerably deviates from the concept of leadership and religious-based government replaced by the rule of reason in its philosophical sense . The theory of Plato's philosopher and the government of Aristotle philosophers greatly influenced the scholars of Shia however; you can observe the manifestations of this influence in the theoris of Farabi chairman or the authority of Azami or authority of Afazel of Khaje Nasir Tusi.
The second period:
During this period, political debates in the form of jurisprudence such as the issue of ordering to good and forbidding the wrongs, jihad, the judiciary, the issue of probate matters, the issue of Velayat and other fields of jurisprudence are being determined. This period is nearly begins from 700 AD and overshadows until 14th century political life of Shiite. Unlike the second period which political thought grasped with wisdom had were seeking through the theories of philosophers to establish an Islamic state and to some extent the element of politics had excluded from politics , in the third period, politics is severely circles from philosophe and backs to law of religion. However, this time, instead of propose in its original position in theology, it locates in jurisprudence and secondary principals of religion and Velayat which was the essential foundation of political theory of Shiite is limited in this period in the form of jurisprudence chapters. The siege as the rational blockade, quite honorably results for Shiite political knowledge because the basic issues of policy that its position was in the principles of religion relegates to the religion secondary and the political theory of Ahl Sonnat directly influences the one of Shiite. In this period, Velayat is exactly escaped the word out and buried however, the legal arguments was flourished because it was not in its original position , no longer it has its growth and development. The manifestations of politics can be found in in the works of Marhoum Naraqi, in his book, Avayed Al Ayam, the book of Islam’s rules, Marhoom Mohaqeq, the book Javaher Al Kalam, of Marhoum Najafi, the book of Mesbah Al Faqia, Misbah al-Faqih by Reza Hamadani, the valuable book of Sheikh Ansari, the thoughts of Akhund Khorasani and some other works can observed.
The fourth period:
The fourth period of political thoughts of Shiite, is the turmoil era of political theories, in this era, the course of law teaching center comes out from the realm of religious schools and extends to academic environments such as new universities and schools. Tools and ideology of modern civilization, rises against to debate and deal with religion and Iranian Revolutionary Guards of religious thoughts in dealing with these changes, using the element of effort, tries to infer a new understanding of political knowledge. Undoubtedly, this new understanding, proposes a new source for Shiite politics that its scope from excellent supervision on the political system to prevent deviation from divine law is ended to gaining power to establish a political system based on religion. We must seek the estimate of interactions of political thoughts with new culture and the invasions of new civilization in the latest century publicly in two major trends. A group of researchers, scientists and scholars of Shia in dealing with these developments have implemented all their efforts to this new understanding of ability to respond religious knowledge by providing a new understanding of religious knowledge so that this new understanding have the ability to respond to the findings of the time and their compliance with the law of religion. From the viewpoints of the followers of this insight, the religion has the ability to respond to all human problems in social life at all times. Therefore, to adapt religion to a new culture, innovation in the nature the law not only is not necessary, but is contrary to the philosophy of the mission of the prophets and the finality of prophesy. What is organizing the basis of this insight is neo-believing of religion neo- understanding of law of religion and not innovation in religion because the origin of religion is a live, stable and sustainable truth and the philosophy human community is also connection to this stable reality. Therefore, the adoption of any innovation in the fundamentals of this reality has been contrary to the philosophy of perfection of divine law and the finality of prophesy however, the concept of innovation in insight regarded as acceptance of failure , shortcomings and corruption in religion. We call the Followers of this theory as the revivals of religious thought and their movement as revival movement. In front of revivalists of religious thoughts, there are some of Shia intellectuals who interpret the adaptation of religion in a way that in understanding this group, the religion is a reality in which most of rules and religious principals has been prepared in specific conditions for culture and specific era of time. These conditions, practically puts religion, in response to the needs of human society in the critical situations so, to adapt religious law with this case, the need for innovation, does not have any opposition with reality of religion but, it is a crucial action which guarantees the survival of religion in the cultural invasions of West . In this combination, solving the problems of society is not possible except based on dynamic jurisprudence and using of epistemology and methodology of modern civilization. We call the followers of this doctrine as the reformers of religion and their movement as reforming one.
The Islamic- Iranian –theory of international relations:
Talking about the theory of international relations with Iranian – Islamic features is account of this concept that the source of theories of international relations does not clearly match the global distribution of its subjects. In fact, this is part of this big questions in the field of non-Western discourse that “why there is no non-western theories of international relations” the West’s responses to this question is that if in the past, “political theory” against” the theory of international relations” have focused the concept of “the good life” facing “survival theory”, the modern equivalent of a good life in international relations the modern equivalent is the good life in international relations, we could seek democratic peace, interdependence and convergence and institutional arrangements as well as the relationship between the norm and calculated results in the west while non-Western states are continuously the realm of fight for survival. Today, the eyes regarding non-Western theories of international relations are on Asia , because this continent is the only focus of non-Western power and wealth and also because Asia has a long history of international relations which is quite different from the history of international relations. Nowadays, it is a believe that the theory of international relations is not non-Western per se , but it is an open area not unreasonable if we have been expecting that at least non- Westerns to the extent that share in the practice of international relations to have been shared in theorizing , as well.
In general, we can determine four main types of works as non-Western views in the domain of international affairs:
First , similar to reliance which Western theories of international relations have on figures such as Thucydides , Hobbes , Machiavelli , Kant and etc. In Asia, we have ancient traditions and old ideas of religious, political and military figures such as Sun Tzu, Confucius and Katylyia and Iran - Islamic thinkers we have such as Avicenna , Farabi , Nizam al-Mulk and so on which ,concerning all of them, there are first or second hand concepts as political theory . The second group backs to the ideas and approaches of foreign policy of Asian leaders like Nehru's, Mao , Aung San , Myanmar, the Philippines Jose Rytsal and Imam Khomeini ( RA). The third type of works belongs to non-Westerns who have accepted non-Western ideas of international relations. The types of this category include IP Rana and County Bajpay in India, Cheung iin moun in Korean, Malaysian Mvtya Lagapay, and Aynvgvshy in Japan and Zhang Yvngjyn in China. The fourth category with examining the events and experiences of Asia ,develops concepts that we can implement them as a tool for the analysis of more general patterns in international relations and determining of the position of Asia in all the international system and comparing it with other parts of the world . Some of the finest of these concepts include Anderson’s works and Scouts’ daily shapes of resist. What can we say about the Iranian Islamic political knowledge in school is that in the world of Islamic - Iranian attitudes , there are bases for different ways of organizing observing knowledge on international relations. These different methods are based on the powers of ideas such as faith , justice and trying toward a good life full of religious spirituality and not just the pursuit of material interests and power but, the Islamic world as a region , is suffering troubles in terms of ability to perform Islamic theories practically. Perhaps this situation is not only the result of this reality that the Muslim world lacks that financial independence to be able to offer alternative views of the world and stay adherence to it but, it has passed it and return to that in Islamic world , discourses despite of their dynamic natures are fragmented, too.
Conclusion:
As the title of this article is assumed, in the course of the history of human life (modernism ) a special appropriation of all natural and social phenomena was proposed and then, by rejection and exclusion of other new perceptions , an exclusively reading from that domain of knowledge was provided in a hegemonic way . In the field of thinking international relations which also has a centuries-old history formally and academically introduced itself for some decades as the only narrator of this domain. But, with regard to developments in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and questioning the principles and assumptions of this current which was mainly rooted in positivism, space and room to breathe and grow for other alternatives was provided. One of these mentioned alternatives is Islamic – Iranians theorizing from international relations. As more theories of international relations are indebted to philosophical and west –oriented political thoughts and efforts, the products and accomplishments of political ideas in Islam and Iran can also introduce themselves in theorizing as one of new theories in the domain of international relationships. In fact, a theory that instead of assuming material- oriented case is thinking of international environment as anarchic, power driven, giving a major role for the state, the separation of domestic and foreign policy so that it can provide different implications of international relations based on Islamic teaching and concepts.