‎"Dialogical Theory: A Model for Resolving the Problem of ‎Epistemic Pluralism in the Contemporary World" (From the ‎Concept of Shared Truth in Mulla Sadra’s Integrative ‎Perspective to Habermas's Deliberative Democracy)‎

The historical transition of humanity from an instinctive existence to a social sphere has consistently rested upon the vital foundation of "communication." However, in the modern era, the profound paradox between the "growing plurality of thoughts" and the "crisis of mutual understanding" has led to deep cultural, epistemological, and identity conflicts. The project of modernity, with its promise of emancipatory rationality, sought to establish a shared and universal language. Yet, the gradual dominance of "logical positivism" and the total hegemony of "instrumental rationality" transformed science and technology into tools for domination and the objectification of relationships. This ultimately resulted in the weakening, colonization, and subjugation of the lifeworld, creating a profound rupture in intersubjective bonds and shared understanding within human relations. In contemporary thought, approaches to the question of dialogue (its necessity, methods, outcomes, etc.) have undergone significant shifts; dialogue has evolved from a simple communicative tool into a fundamental basis for generating a collective approach to social life and fostering a shared orientation toward various human issues. Although this idea is viewed in the Western world as a recent achievement rooted in Greek philosophical capital and historical developments, an examination of classical Islamic thinkers, such as Mulla Sadra, reveals that a dialogical approach was also embedded in the generation of their philosophical and intellectual schools, even if it was not formally frameworks or articulated as such. Elucidating this latent characteristic within the thoughts of Muslim philosophers can serve as a foundation for intercultural dialogues with other contemporary approaches.
The ultimate objective of this study is to transcend reductionist descriptions of dialogue and formulate an "epistemological model for resolving intersubjective conflicts." The central question is how, through a comparative, critical, and synergistic rereading of two distinct intellectual traditions—namely, the modern West (focusing on the Critical School) and Islamic philosophy (centered on Transcendent Philosophy)—one can attain a "structured dialogical model" that relies on "epistemological synergy," "the validation of shared and communal truth," and "interactive rationality," rather than the elimination, exclusion, or violent confrontation of ideas.
This research seeks to demonstrate how a new framework for managing plurality within educational and epistemological systems can be delineated by synthesizing Habermas’s "communicative rationality" and the idea of deliberative democracy with Mulla Sadra’s "transcendental methodology." Utilizing a "descriptive-analytical" method and a "comparative-inferential" approach to achieve these goals, the analytical process was conducted in three stages: first, analyzing the foundations of "communicative action" and the "public sphere" in Habermas's thought; second, rereading Mulla Sadra's dialogical ethos in synthesizing the schools of Peripateticism, Illuminationism, mysticism, and revelation; and third, deducing a hybrid model through a dialogue between these two intellectual horizons. Data were collected via library research based on primary texts and analyzed using a problem-oriented approach.
The comparative analysis demonstrates that both approaches provide an effective space for rational action, consensus, and dialogue-based understanding, despite their differing epistemological foundations and arguments. The secondary objective highlights the reality that dialogue is not merely a moral virtue, but an ontological and methodological necessity for validating knowledge in the contemporary world.
The research findings indicate that dialogical theory, at both modern and classical levels, possesses strategic capacities for resolving contemporary crises. In Habermas's view, dialogue is the primary vehicle for transitioning from "instrumental rationality" to "communicative rationality." The legitimacy of norms and the realization of deliberative democracy depend on a non-dominating dialogical space where understanding triumphs over power. In Mulla Sadra's view, although he did not directly employ modern terms of dialogue theory, the ontological foundations of his "Transcendent Philosophy"—by virtue of being grounded in the theories of the gradation of existence  and intensifying substantial motion (al-harakah al-jawhariyyah al-ishtidadiyyah)—possess an inherently dynamic and dialogical nature. Through a methodical, non-eclectic synthesis of plural epistemological traditions and by avoiding the common exclusionisms of his time, Mulla Sadra offers a "synergistic and transcendental" model that views truth as a single reality possessing different degrees and aspects. The findings show that dialogue can replace intellectual confrontations as an "epistemological paradigm." The proposed framework is an interactive model based on "rationality and understanding" on one hand, and "epistemological synthesis and perfectionism" (Mulla Sadra) on the other. This model can serve as a foundation for formal educational systems to prepare the new generation for a constructive engagement with intellectual diversity and the generation of shared ideas. The dynamism of intellectual schools depends on dialogical openness and the avoidance of dogmatism. The innovation of this research lies in the integration of these two perspectives. Based on the findings of this study, the dialogical approach can form the basis for interdisciplinary analyses and the design of consensus-oriented mechanisms when confronting epistemological pluralism, offering a balanced perspective for the positions of thinkers in the contemporary world.