Description and Examination of New Views About Religious Science with emphasis on the attitudes of Abd-olkarim Soroush, Mostafa Malekian, Ali Paya and bijan abdolkarimi

This thesis provides an account of the criticisms articulated by four important critics of religious science in Iran, namely, Dr. Abd-olkarim Soroush, Mostafa Malekian and Dr. Ali Paya. To have a conceptual framework and clarify the issue, in the first step, I have discussed topics such as the meaning and concept of religious science, the basis for developing the idea of religious science, and the leading approaches to the religious science. Dr. Soroush’s Position on the issue of religious science has been subject to variation from pioneering in providing a reading of religious science in Iran to censuring the idea of Islamic science. In early 60s, he put forward a minimalist reading of religious science; but in 70s, roundly criticized the current of religiousizing the science in Islamic world. By distinguishing between the level of theory (Sobout) and the level of reality (Esbat) in his criticisms, Dr. Soroush, intentionally or not, deterred the advocates of religious science from muddling this two levels up – though in some cases he himself has make this mistake. Malekian’s criticisms, which are more analytic and more precise and more useful but still criticizable, draw the advocates’ attention to presuppositions and bases of the idea of generating religious science. He thinks that generating religious science is possible but attempted measurements were unsuccessful and speaks of important and worthwhile concerns in this regard. From the position of a proponent of critical realist philosophy of science, Dr. Paya scrutinizes the idea of religious science. Emphasizing on distinction between the science and the technology and distinguishing between the nature of social science and the nature of some of humanities, he says that generating religious science is impossible but defends possibility and desirability of religious and indigenous technology. In short, the criticisms of these four opponents not only don’t make major challenge to this idea but contain fruitful points and shed light on theoretical discussions in this regard. These criticisms also expose and reveal the disadvantages and hidden parts of the idea. In examining these criticisms, beside describing them, I will try to use the analytic method.