چكيده لاتين
This study aims to provide a comparative analysis of the prevalent methods of teaching Islamic philosophy in Iran and general philosophy in France at the high school level, focusing on the challenges and educational outcomes associated with these approaches. Employing a qualitative case study methodology, the research investigates two distinct educational contexts: the Iranian high school system, where Islamic philosophy is integrated within a culturally and religiously influenced curriculum, and the French lycée system, where philosophy is taught as a secular subject emphasizing critical thinking, debate, and analytical writing. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with educators, curriculum designers, and subject experts, as well as a comprehensive review of textbooks and educational documents from both countries.
The findings reveal fundamental differences in educational philosophy, instructional methods, and the role of the teacher, while also identifying areas of convergence, particularly in promoting independent thinking and moral reasoning. In Iran, teaching methods are more prescriptive and heavily influenced by religious and cultural frameworks, whereas in France, pedagogy encourages open-ended inquiry, discussion, and intellectual autonomy. The comparative analysis highlights the influence of societal, cultural, and political factors on curriculum design and classroom practice, and emphasizes the potential benefits of integrating reflective and dialogical teaching strategies to enhance philosophical education in both contexts.
This research contributes to the field of comparative education by providing an in-depth understanding of how philosophical instruction can foster critical and independent thought within culturally diverse educational systems, offering insights for policymakers, educators, and curriculum developers seeking to improve philosophy teaching practices globally.
