نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
گروه فلسفه، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه یاسوج، یاسوج، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Science and religion and their relationship are significant and novel topics in philosophy and theology, which, according to a famous classification that is agreed upon by many scholars, can be classified into four categories: conflict, distinction, interaction, and unity. As scientific advancements began to challenge the literal interpretations of the Bible and Torah, scholars and theologians sought to reconcile these seemingly disparate domains of knowledge. Some expressed the view that we should correct our understanding of religion and the Holy Bible, or that the universe has proven things that cannot be refuted, so what we understand from the Holy Bible is not correct. This theory appeared in various ways and forms, and eventually, its wave reached other regions and religions, including Islamic countries, and Muslim intellectuals. The theory of theoretical contraction and expansion of Sharia, a prominent concept within Islamic epistemology, posits that religious knowledge, like any other form of human knowledge, is inherently dynamic and subject to ongoing refinement. This theory asserts that as human understanding of the world evolves and new knowledge emerges, religious interpretations must adapt accordingly, undergoing periods of both contraction (re-evaluation of existing doctrines) and expansion (incorporation of new insights). However, this theory was criticized by many religious thinkers. Therefore, this article undertakes a critical evaluation of certain criticisms leveled against Mustafa Malekian and Abdullah Javadi Amoli's theory of contraction and expansion of Sharia, examining these critiques through the lens of Abdul Karim Soroush's philosophical framework.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)