• Home
  • farzad azarkamand
    • List of Articles farzad azarkamand

      • Open Access Article

        1 - Comparison of Authoritarian Government and the Relationship of People with Government in Ghazali and Hobbes
        mohamad ali tavana farzad azarkamand
        This article studies the basics of forming powerful government and the relationship between people with government in Ghazali and Hobbes thought. Special view of both of the thinkers to nature of human is intellectual foundation of forming authoritative government. Acco Full Text
        This article studies the basics of forming powerful government and the relationship between people with government in Ghazali and Hobbes thought. Special view of both of the thinkers to nature of human is intellectual foundation of forming authoritative government. According to the four human traits, Ghazali tries to educate the divine human that acts passively under divine governance. Since religion and politics don’t separate from each other in Ghazali’s view, so in government, divinity of these traits joins to politics and powerful government. But Hobbes believed that human have power demand and warrior nature in addition, in primary and natural human condition, the war has been going on against each other. And human try to rescue themselves according to their wisdom. So, they established an authoritative government with their foresight. Therefore, the subject of both of them is largely same, but their processing is different. It means that both of these intellectuals lived in restless period, and the necessity of security causes them to resort to authoritative government. On the other hand, both of these intellectuals assign passive roles for people; however, Ghazali’s argumentation method is canonical and Hobbes’s method is rational. Moreover it seems that the rational theory of Hobbes – accepting the possibility of insurgence-paves the way for going beyond the authoritative government, although the canonical theory of Hobbes leads to one type of reproduction of authoritative government. Manuscript Document
      • Open Access Article

        2 - The Archetypes and Political Myths of Modern age: Based on the theoretical framework of “Carl Gustave Young”
        mohamad ali tavana farzad azarkamand
        “Carl Gustave young” is one of the most prominent contemporary intellectuals who studied the subject of Archetypes and their reproduction in modern political myths framework. From young’s view, the Archetypes are included as categories that are inherited from forefather Full Text
        “Carl Gustave young” is one of the most prominent contemporary intellectuals who studied the subject of Archetypes and their reproduction in modern political myths framework. From young’s view, the Archetypes are included as categories that are inherited from forefathers and lineages and consists some parts of our unconscious. The Archetypes showed off in the frame of myths and fables ; but- in contrary to enlightenment prediction-not only they did not eradicate , but also they expose the modern political life to much changes. One of its prominent changes is the formation of modern political ideologies and mass movements. Simply said, the Archetypes continue to live in another form in modern age. Based on this fact, this essay tries to study the relationships between modern political myths and Archetypes, Based on the theoretical framework of “Carl Gustave Young”. The main question of this essay is: How do the Archetypes reproduce in modern human’s soul? The hypothesis of this essay is that these Archetypes have sediment in unconscious of human and the modern charismatic leaders have activated them again through rearticulating of Archetypes. The approach of this essay is ideology (Knowing thought). It means that it reconstructs the formation process of Archetypes in modern age. The method of the essay is also qualitative content analysis. It means that it deals with analyzing (derivation, argumentation for or against) the ideas and concepts related with Archetypes. We can consider the most important finding of the present research as following: in the recent modernity age, the Archetypes exist in human’ unconscious and the psychological and social crises (like confusion among tradition and modernism) can provide this opportunity for authoritarian charismatic leaders to activate them again. Simply said, in the current age, the context of totalitarian ideologies formation-based on Archetypes -is provided Manuscript Document