• Home
  • Seyed Mohammad Ali Taghavi
  • OpenAccess
    • List of Articles Seyed Mohammad Ali Taghavi

      • Open Access Article

        1 - The Avoidance of Thinking in A Religious Culture: A Review and Critique of Aramesh Doostdar’s Points of View
        Seyed Mohammad Ali Taghavi Fatemeh Baee
        Aramesh Doostdar considers “lack of question” as the main difficulty of Iranian society, which has been dominated by a religious culture since the ancient time. In this paper, his views are assessed on the basis of postmodern observations. Richard Rorty speaks of two ac More
        Aramesh Doostdar considers “lack of question” as the main difficulty of Iranian society, which has been dominated by a religious culture since the ancient time. In this paper, his views are assessed on the basis of postmodern observations. Richard Rorty speaks of two accounts of rationality: a broad account which he favours and a narrow one which he crticises and attributes to modern thinkers. The main question in this paper is that in which category Doostdar’s views can be classified? It seems that he advocates the narrow modernist account of rationality that considers whatever does not comply with it as outside reason. Doostdar’s metanarrative on Iranian culture is based on unjustified extrapolations that ignore the complexity of the culture. Since he believes that Islamic and Iranian culture lacks fundamental philosophical questions, he disregards all other types of questions raised in that culture. In politics, Doostdar argues that the relationship between religion and the state in Iran, since the Achaemenid Empire, constituted the religious culture in the society in such a way that any escape from it and transition towards a developed society would be impossible. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        2 - A Comparative Study of Rorty’s Irony and Foucault’s Parrhesia
        MohammadReza Sedghi Rezvani Seyed Mohammad Ali Taghavi
        Irony is one of the constitutive concepts in Richard Rorty’s pragmatism. The ironist is his ideal type of the person: self-creative and self-conscious, aware of his own contingency, anti-foundationalist, and always ready to revise his account of the self and the world r More
        Irony is one of the constitutive concepts in Richard Rorty’s pragmatism. The ironist is his ideal type of the person: self-creative and self-conscious, aware of his own contingency, anti-foundationalist, and always ready to revise his account of the self and the world radically. Michel Foucault, on the other hand, is concerned with the concept parrhesia. Parrhesiastes is a type of person comparable to the ironist. Hence, the main question in this paper is: what are the similarities and differences between the Rorty’s ironist and Foucault’s parrhesiastes. We will see that while the ironist is keen to confine irony to the private realm, in order not to humiliate anybody, the parrhesiastes has no reluctance to go beyond the limits of the private, and to speak the truth. He does not avoid the risk of saying the truth to those in power even at the cost of his life, while the former is more cautious. Self-creation and autonomy is shared between the two types of personalities. Socrates is the embodiment of both personalities. He is praised as an ironist as well as a parrhesiastes. Manuscript profile