a comparative study of the influence of continental and analytical philosophy on the religious innovators in the islamic republic of iran (with an emphasis on reza davari ardakani and abdolkarim soroush)

the two discourses with a focus on reza davari ardekani and abdolkarim soroush, were formed in iran’s society. soroush’s discourse, with religious interests influenced by islamic sources, poper’s philosophy of science, logic and epistemological accuracies of analytical philosophy and consciously liberalism, is looking for compatibility with modernity. the second discourse on reza davari ardakani thought and its intellectual ancestry, i.e., ahmad fardid in combination with the religious, identical, heideggerian and continental interests began to deal with anti-modern interpretations such as, the defense of philosophy in opposition to the oriented logic and scientism, the use of anti-enlightenment western assumptions about society, politics, religion, science, and the religious stance against subjectivity or the rationality of modern man as well. the discourses, each in turn, had a significant impact on forming political and social attitudes, both religious and non-religious, and sought to respond to the problems raised in iran’s community. discussions of both discourses (some consider them philosophical and  others ideological), which have their roots in pre-islamic revolution, began with disputes from the beginning of revolution and consistently the differences reached their peak. but in recent times, the discussions of the two thinkers came closer together, and partly achieved some common standpoints. the aim of present paper, therefore, is to study the thoughts of reza davari ardekani and abdolkarim soroush, influenced by continental and analytic philosophy, using a comparative research method. it is explained how soroush, consciously, with his religious interests, sought to become  compatibile with modernity; but unlike such approach, the stance of davari ardekani, along with his own religious interests, was against subjectivity or modern rationality.