نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
This study seeks to examine the relationship between sacred language and the domain of public policymaking within the framework of Islamic governance, and to explore latent dimensions and underlying tensions in this field through an explication of the thought of Ludwig Wittgenstein. The central claim is that an excessive emphasis on the stabilization and consolidation of religious language in contemporary Iran, without due attention to the plurality of forms of life and the continuous transformations of society, has led to the emergence of parallel language games. This tension ultimately not only undermines the foundations of the effectiveness of public policies but also gradually erodes the social contract based on a shared language. In this regard, first, Wittgenstein’s theoretical foundations concerning language, meaning, and language games are examined; then, its capacities and limitations in analyzing religious language and Islamic governance are presented. This study critically emphasizes the fact that religious language in the political sphere acquires a role that goes beyond ordinary linguistic functions. In particular, by drawing on examples from population policies, family law, youth population policies, and the notion of expediency of the system, it demonstrates how the tension between official language and the lived language of everyday life leads to irony, sarcasm, figurative reappropriations, and multiple reinterpretations. Finally, practical—not merely rhetorical—solutions are proposed for rethinking religious language in policymaking, including the simplification of juridical-legal discourse, the establishment of deliberative dialogue institutions, and the removal of systemic silences in political discourse.
The study first outlines Wittgenstein’s theoretical contributions and evaluates their strengths and limitations in analyzing religious discourse and governance. It argues that religious language in politics functions not merely as a tool of communication, but as a contested arena of power, legitimacy, and identity. Drawing on cases such as demographic policies, family law, legislation on youth and population growth, and the principle of expediency, it demonstrates how the gap between official discourse and everyday language fosters irony, satire, neologisms, and reinterpretations.
Finally, the dissertation proposes practical strategies for rethinking the religious lexicon of policymaking, including the simplification of juristic–legal language, the establishment of institutionalized dialogue, and the removal of systematic silences in political discourse.
کلیدواژهها English
