تحليل مقايسه اي انديشۀسياسي ميرزاي نائيني و جان لاك

Comparative Analysis of the Political Thought of Mirzai Naini an‎d John Locke

علوم سياسي

This study, with an emphasis on the historical context of the Iranian Constitutional Revolution an‎d the Glorious Revolution in Englan‎d, examines the theoretical foundations, key concepts, an‎d socio-political implications of the thought of these two thinkers. Naeini, drawing upon the principles of Imami jurisprudence an‎d the distinction between primary an‎d secondary rulings, articulated the legitimacy of constitutional government within a religious framework an‎d underscored the supervisory role of jurists in restraining despotic power. By contrast, John Locke, relying on natural rights, the social contract, an‎d secular rationality, formulated the foundations of limited government grounded in the consent of the governed. Employing a comparative-analytical method an‎d addressing components such as the legitimacy of government, the relationship between religion an‎d politics, law, liberty, property, the role of the people, an‎d the separation of powers, this study demonstrates that although both thinkers sought to constrain absolute authority, divergences in theological premises, the role of religion in the public sphere, an‎d the historical-cultural contexts of the two societies led to different outcomes in the transition from tradition to modernity. Ultimately, this research, while explicating the commonalities an‎d distinctions of these two intellectual frameworks, analyzes their influence on the socio-political transformations of Iran an‎d Englan‎d an‎d assesses the capacities an‎d limitations of each in responding to the challenges of the modern age.

6