پُست-پوزیتویسم به مثابه رهیافت پژوهشی در دانش حقوق عمومی

پُست-پوزیتویسم به مثابه یکی از نحله‌های فکری- فلسفی معاصر، با اثرپذیری از انتقادات وارده به پوزیتویسم شکل گرفته است. این نحله فکری در سطح متدلوژی تحقیق قابل طرح است. پرسش این است که آیا پست‌-پوزیتویسم می‌تواند به مثابه رهیافت پژوهشی در دانش حقوق عمومی ظاهر شود؟ این پژوهش به‌لحاظ هدف بنیادی بوده و از لحاظ جمع آوری اسناد، کتابخانه‌ای می‌باشد. همچنین برای تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات از روش توصیفی- تحلیلی استفاده شده است. بر مبنای یافته‌های این مقاله، نخست، کمتر پژوهشی را در جامعه علمی فارسی زبان سراغ داریم که به متدلوژی پژوهش توجه نموده و ذیل آن، روش تحقیق را تعریف نماید. این در حالیست که شناخت علمی شایسته می‌طلبد پژوهشگران تکلیف خود را با مکاتب فلسفی و پارادایم‌ها مشخص نموده و ذیل آن، روش پژوهشی خود را توضیح دهند؛ دوم، هر شناختی را نمی‌توان شناخت علمی تلقی نمود، شناخت علمیِ درست، تابع پارادایم های فلسفی است که در صورت عدم توجه به آن، خروجی پژوهش، اعتبار علمی نخواهد داشت؛ سوم، پست-پوزیتویسم به مثابه یک رهیافت پژوهشی، به دانش حقوق عمومی قابل تعمیم است؛ چهارم، این نحله فکری، پژوهشگران حقوق عمومی را قادر می‌سازد تا در کنار استفاده از تکنیک‌های آماری به روش تحقیق توصیفی و تاریخی (به مثابه شناخت زمینه‌ای) تمسک بجویند.

post-positivism as a research approach in public law

introductionthe importance of research methodology is already highlighted, as the validity of knowledge depends on aligning the research design and methodology with dominant paradigms. post-positivism is a contemporary philosophical approach that has developed in response to criticisms of positivism. it plays a significant role in research methodology, influencing both the research process and the output. as a theoretical legal inquiry, the present research employed a descriptive–analytical method to examine the applicability of post-positivism in research on public law. the research question is as follows: can post-positivism be applied as a research approach in public law? literature reviewthere is a lack of persian-language publications on post-positivism as a research approach in public law. however, there are a few studies in the broader field of research. for example, the article “the turn towards post-positivism” (tayeb, 2002) discusses post-positivism from the perspective of social sciences, addressing its challenges as well as the reactions it has generated. in “introducing a new framework for epistemology of future studies,” chaparak et al. (2019) explored positivism in the context of social sciences and examined future directions in epistemology. its relevance to the present study lies in its forward-looking approach and the consideration of emerging developments in the field of knowledge. moreover, eftekhari’s “positivist methodology in security studies” (2003) addressed the criticisms of positivism and offered a detailed discussion of its classifications, which is fundamentally significant for the concern of the present research. as reflected in the existing literature, the current article presents a new perspective within persian-speaking academia, as no prior research has addressed post-positivism in the context of public law. materials and methodsas a theoretical legal study, this research employed a descriptive–analytical method to examine the applicability of post-positivism in research on public law. results and discussionthe post-positivist approach enables researchers to move beyond linear thinking and embrace epistemological diversity as a core scientific principle. it also emphasizes the importance of interpretation and the practical application of theories. research within the post-positivist paradigm can be both quantitative and qualitative. the qualitative post-positivist research aims to describe ongoing processes or the prevailing values within a society. moreover, this type of research is to predict the reproduction of actions in individual interactions by examining temporal, cultural, or spatial conditions. as a developing discipline, public law critically needs to engage with issues at both foundational and philosophical levels. without a thorough examination of its intellectual and methodological underpinnings, drawing reliable conclusions in empirical matters remains unlikely. acknowledging this need, the current research aimed to explore the pre-methodological nature of inquiry and, in turn, assess the potential of post-positivism as a viable research approach in public law. intellectual and philosophical schools of thought serve as research paradigms that shape a structured path toward scientific understanding. this is particularly important in the humanities for two key reasons. first, not all forms of knowledge possess scientific validity; only those examined through the lens of philosophical schools—where the researcher clearly situates themselves within a specific research paradigm—can be considered scientifically sound. second, we are living in an era where many concepts in academic community lack rigorous scientific substance and often fall within the realm of semi-valid or even pseudo-science. approaching public law through the perspective of philosophical schools offers a valuable criterion for distinguishing genuine scientific inquiry from pseudo-science.