نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه فقه شافعی، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
2 دانشیار، گروه فقه شافعی دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
3 استاد، گروه فقه شافعی، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
4 استادیار، گروه فقه شافعی، دانشکده علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه کردستان، سنندج، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The presuppositions of any scientific theory are a set of pre-interpretive norms that play an effective role in the processing and formulation of the principle of the theory, and are considered and observed in the interpretation and analysis of sub-issues and inferring its results. The function of presuppositions is to maintain the internal coherence of the theory and the theoretical justification of its results and their meaningful connection with each other. Based on this, jurisprudential presuppositions are a priori assumptions based on which the jurist organizes the framework of his jurisprudential theory and remains loyal to them in the stage of interpretation of Sharia texts and derivation of secondary rulings. The presuppositions of jurisprudence are mainly the product of the jurist's general understanding of Sharia and his expectations from its set of rules and rulings. Therefore, the distinction between the preconceptions of the jurists should be considered as one of the most fundamental factors of jurisprudential differences. This research, using the descriptive-analytical method and referring to library sources, after explaining the meaning of jurisprudence default, has come to the conclusion that jurisprudence defaults are influenced by factors such as: educational environment, family and social conditions in addition to the psychological characteristics and scope of the jurist's information. Considering the importance of the issue and the lack of comprehensive research in this regard, it seems necessary to investigate such an issue.
کلیدواژهها [English]