Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities

Social construction of Future Reality With emphasis on interdisciplinary studies

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

A. Rezayan Ghayehbashi 1
A. Pourezzat 2

1 Post Doctoral Researcher in Futures Studies. Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor of Public Policy, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22035/isih.2018.286
Abstract
Organizations, community groups, elites, and government policies in many ways influence the process of future construction, while they are heavily influenced by various scholars. Based on the theories of social status and socialization, and the policy model for the elite of the masses, the future is continually being influenced by the individual and organizational elements that are active in the society, and these individuals and organizations, usually they formulate their actions with scientific justifications, which are taught in interaction with scientists and elites. Moreover, the scientific findings from the efforts of various scholars may be influenced by a set of theories focused on the implementation of the future world. Because these interdisciplinary sciences are the theoretical outcomes of various sciences and technologies, they affect theories and strategies of change and future transformation programs; the effect of the influence of knowledge in the general language, the logic of government agents, and the procedures Behavioral and constructive structure in the process of development of organizations and social institutions. This article discusses how the future is made. The process of constructing the future introduces the ultimate social components, linguistic facts, decision-making and active actors of actors (organizations, people, and elites). These components shape the future reality by influencing interdisciplinary sciences and their mutual influence on it.

Keywords

Futures Studies
Social Construction of Reality
Interdisciplinary
Policy Modeling

Subjects

Azar, A., & Momeny, M. (2009). Āmār va kārbord-e ān dar modiriyat [Statistics and its application in management]. Tehran, Iran: Samt.
Ahmadi, B. (2002). Marx va siyāsat-e modern [Marx and modern politics]. Tehran, Iran: Markaz.
Asil, H. (2002). Ārmānšahr dar andiše-ye Irāni [Utopia in Iranian thought]. Tehran, Iran: Ney.
Alvani, M., & Sharifzadeh, F. (2000). Farāyand-e xat-e mašygozāri-ye omumi [Public policy process]. Tehran, Iran: Allame Tabataba'i University Press.
Paya, A. (2007). Molāhezāti naqqādāne darbāre-ye Dow mafhum-e elm-e dini va elm-e bumi [Critical considerations about the concept of religious knowledge and indigenous knowledge]. Journal of Wisdom and Philosophy Quarterly, 3(10&11), 39-76. doi: 10.22054/wph.2007.6689
Paya, A. (2009). Āyande-ye olum-e ensāni dar Iran [The future of humanities in Iran]. Journal o f Howze and University Quarterly, 12(49), 9-24.
Pourezzat, A. A. (2003). Tasvirpardāzi az āyande, strategy-ye eqdām dar systemhā-ye ejtemā'i [Imagery from the future action strategy in social systems]. Journal of Soxan Samt, 10, 31-52.
Pourezzat, A. A. (2005). Tasvirpardāzi-ye basiratbaxš az āyande-ye mo'ud: Strategy-ye foq-e fa'āl-e entezār-e šahr-e adl dar Iran [Imagery insightful from the promised future: Extra-active strategy for the city of justice in Iran]. Journal of Kamāl Modiriyat, 8&9, 57-82.
Pourezzat, A. A. (2008). Moxtasāt-e hokumat-e haqmadār, dar partow-e Nahjolbalaghe Imām Ali [Coordinates rightful government in the light of the Nahj-ol-Balagh]. Tehran, Iran: Šerkat-e Entešārāt-e Elmi va Farhangi.
Khorsandi Taskouh, A. (2013). Goftemān-e miyānreštei-ye dāneš [Interdisciplinary discourse of knowledge]. Tehran, Iran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Ministry of  Science, Research and Tecnology.
Rezayan, A., & Kazemi, M. (2014). Tasvirpardāzi va kalāntasāvir-e āyande-ye siyāsat-e jahāni: Tasvirpardāzi raveši monāseb barāye šenāxt-e āyande dar jahān-e pičide [Imagery and macro images of future world politics; Suitable method to predict the complex world]. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 6(3), 173-200. doi: 10.7508/isih.2014.23.007
Rezayan, A. (2017). Āyandenegāri-ye tahdidhā-ye amniyati-ye nāši az taghir-e eqlim dar Iran [Foresight of security threats posed by climate change in Iran] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).  Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Rezayan, A., & Rezayan, A. H. (2016). Āyandepažuhi-ye bohrān-e āb dar Iran be raveš-e scenariopardāzi [Future studies of water crisis in Iran based on processing scena]. Iranian Journal of Ecohydrology, 3(1), 1-17. doi: 10.22059/IJE.2016.59185
Sariolghalam, M. (2002). Aqlāniyat va āyande-ye towse'eyāftegi-ye Iran [Rationality and future of development of Iran]. Tehran, Iran: Markaz-e Pažuhešhā-ye Elmi va Motāle’āt-e Estrātejik-e Xāvarmiyāne/Scientific Research and Middle East Strategic Studies Center.
Gholipour, A. (2001). Jāme'ešenāsi-ye sāzmānhā:Ruykard-e jāme'ešenāxti be sāzmān va midiriyat [A sociological approach to organization and management‎]. Tehran, Iran: Samt.
Malekifar, A., et al. (2006). Alefbā-ye āyandepažuhi: Elm va honar-e kašf-e āyande va šekl baxšidan be donyā-ye matlub-e fardā [Futuring alphabet: The science and art of future exploring]. Tehran, Iran: Karāne-ye Elm.
Bell, W. (2004). Foundations of futures studies: History, purposes and knowledge. (Volume 1: Human science for a new era). London: Routledge.
Dator, J. (2002). Futures studies as applied knowledge. In Slaughter RA (ed)., New Thinking for a New Millennium (pp. 105-115), New York: Routledge.
Dye, T. R. (2005). Understanding public policy, Pearson. Prentice Hall.
Frederickson, H.G. (2000). Can bureaucracy be beautiful?. Public Administration Review, 60, 47-53.
Gleick, J. (2005).  Chaos: Making a new science (1st ed.). New York: Penguin.
Hatch, M.J., & Cunliffe, A.N. (1997). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Inayatullah, S. (2008). Six pillars: Futures thinking for transforming. Foresight, 10(1), 4-21.
Keynes, J. M. (1933). An open letter to President Roosevelt. New York Times, 16.
Kraft, M. E., & Furlong, S. R. (2010). Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives. Washington, D.C: CQ Press.
Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Updated edition, Sage.
Orwell, G. (1984).  Animal farm. Harcourt Inc.
Paya, A., & Baradaran Shoraka, H. R. (2009). Futures studies in Iran: Learning through trial and error. Futures,  42(5), 484-495. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2009.11.033
Popper, K.R. (1962). The open society and its enemies (Vol. I: The Spell of Plato). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Pourezzat, A., & Taheri Attar, G. (2009). Professional adhocracy,  an appropriate design for knowledge economy in the light of Mintzberg's perspective. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organization, 7(4), 1-20.
Pourezzat, A., Mollaee, A., & Firouzabadi, M. (2008). Building the future: Undertaking proactive strategy for national outlook. Futures, 40(10), 887-892.doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2008.07.024
Scott, W.R., & Gerald, F.D. (2007). Organization and organizing: Rational, natural, and open system perspectives. New York: Pearson Education.
Toffler, A. (1971). Future shock. New York: Bantam Books.
Gerth, H.H., & Wright Mills, C. (1946). (Eds. & Trans.). From Max Weber: essays in sociology (Pp. 490). New York: Oxford University Press.
Berger, P.L., Luckmann, T., & Zuleta, S. (1968). La construcción social de la realidad (Vol. 975). Buenos Aires: Amorrortu.
Inayatullah, S. (2006). Alternative futures of a challenged democracy. Democracy and Futures, 113-127.
 
 
Send comment about this article
Enter Name.
Enter a valid email address.
Enter a vaid affiliation.
Enter comments (At leaset 10 words)
CAPTCHA Image
Enter Security Code Correctly.

  • Receive Date 14 February 2018
  • Revise Date 10 July 2018
  • Accept Date 04 May 2018

Home

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Reviewers

Submission

Contact Us