---

Background: Part of the current issues related to mobility in urban spaces goes back to the definition and measurement of mobility. Mobility is the capacity to be mobile. Regarding that capacity relates to the individual's mind or the built environment, mobility is defined differently.
Objectives: This study aims to review the theories related to mobility and thus provide a theoretical and operational framework for measuring mobility in urban spaces.
Method: In this regard, the Content analysis method has been used to analyze the data in phases of Preparation, Organization, and classification.
Results: The results of content analysis show that these theories can be divided into three categories of subjectivist, environmentalist, and pluralist theories; Subjective theories focus on the mental nature of mobility and regard mobility as a function of individuals' habits, attitudes, motivations, and norms; In contrast, environmentalist theories pay special attention to the impact of environmental factors such as density, land use mix, and accessibility on the mobility of individuals. Pluralist theories consider citizens' differences according to their personal characteristics and situation, and therefore consider diversity and difference effective in mobility and involve them in the evaluation and measurement process.
Conclusion: The study of the factors affecting mobility shows that mobility is a complex and multilevel concept that is influenced by many factors; therefore, if urban planners want to improve the urban mobility system, they must pay special attention to the role of all these factors and the relationships between them.

---

The main problem of philosophical hermeneutics is the problem of understanding. Understanding is determined in what context, how, and by what components. Gadamer explains these influential components by emphasizing tradition and history and emphasizes the plurality of understanding by expressing the ontological characteristics of human understanding. From this perspective, subjectivist and non-pluralist approaches are denied. In this article, we aim to examine, based on the characteristics of the understanding process in Gadamer's hermeneutic approach, namely historicity, pluralism, eventfulness, practicality, and linguistics, its relationship and proportion with political totalitarianism and pluralism, and to assess the possibility of convergence or incompatibility of the foundations of philosophical hermeneutics with political pluralism as a pluralistic political approach and divergence or compatibility of philosophical hermeneutics with political totalitarianism as a non-pluralistic political approach. Although Gadamer cannot be considered a full-fledged political philosopher, it is possible to examine political systems and their epistemological foundations based on his hermeneutic approach and evaluate their relationship.
 

---

The historic record of pluralism is related to sophastaeyan period. In the present, Jhon Hic discuss a kind of religious pluralism in the extent of christiaity religion with other religions. Reseachers and benefactors everyone, have practiced to disquisition and realization this subject of subject of different sights. We can to see their result of article indeed with different in mystic texts. Among important questions in this way is,”which one of pluralism is consistency with Islam?” What is the logic of pluralists and their original stimulus of accept religious pluralism? Is the neglect or leniency a kind of behavery and public pluralism? The writer in this article practice to analysis this view in the Quran and Mollana’s poetries . Because Mathnavi in comparison with other texts, and practice to spacious legend and right and resolve inverts about this subject, have universality.Writer this article critic thought a few of benefactors a bout pluralism.

---

The concepts of logica docens and logica utens and the discussion of the distinction between them became popular among logicians since the Middle Ages. Of course, this duality was not considered for a long time after the Middle Ages until Peirce, an American logician and pragmatist philosopher, reintroduced it into logical discussions.  Peirce himself used these concepts to express his views on the nature of logic. Today, other logicians such as Priest have used this duality to express and explain various logical issues. In discussions such as examining criticisms of logic, teaching logic, the issue of adopting a logic, logical pluralism, the issue of the possibility of reforming and revising logic, etc. Using this duality can lead to a better confrontation with problems and therefore helps to better explain problems and find solutions to them.
 

---

It is traditionally maintained in structural linguistics that by cutting verbal signs off each other paradigmatically, and enchaining some of them against the others syntagmatically, language system makes a body of text signify a certain meaning which is sustainable through contextual fluctuations. In line with this Saussurian assumption, and in an attempt to ascertain the authorial intention in literary works, many literary scholars have been mistaken rhetorics for criticism, albeit under the rubrics of structural poetics. This article, however, dismisses the futile attempt to pull certain meanings out of literary masterpiecesfor the purpose of investigating the origins of textuality in any work—let it not be shelved as great literature or literary at all. It aims to demonstrate why such mechanical procedures, prevalent in rhetorical studies, cannot account for textuality beyond the question of the thematic unity of a work; wherein textuality and plurality of text are suppressed in favor of the integrity and entirety required for works of verbal art. To account for the extensive significance of text and the abundance of its possible readings, a seemingly heterogeneous body of texts (including a piece of a poem, an extract from an article, and a vignette) has been analyzed within a reader-oriented framework. Drawing on Roland Barthes (1981), Asgari Pashaei (1995) and Christian Metz (1982), I have tried to move away from rhetorics toward a more proper notion of literary criticism.     

---

Asking about the place of religion in a democratic society refers straightforwardly to the kind of pluralism we adopt. Given that intra-societal tensions mark out a democratic pluralistic society, then it seems that there is no doubt that there should be a place for religion and religious people in it. What is crucial for a democratic society is taking a suitable view on pluralism. There could be, at least, two versions of pluralism: Incommensurable or radical and commensurable or moderate. It is argued that the incommensurable account of pluralism confronts with serious problems both theoretically (like the impossibility of outer critique) and practically (like replacing persuasion with force). Rorty advocates a commensurable pluralism based on pragmatic conventions or “know-how” skills without any meta-narrative or translation manual among the doctrines of rival views. However, along with Davidson, it is stated that some kind of translation among the rival views is inevitable. In addition, it is argued that commensurable pluralism could not be limited to merely know-how skills and it needs some know-that insights. This view of pluralism not only opens the door of dialogue, but also provides a basis for removing superficial differences or conflicts between the rivals. Real differences, however, could remain and should be tolerated.

---

---

---

Legal systems occasionally strive to meet the needs of applicants who are seeking credit by creating security devices based on the type of property, type of debt and even the way the debt has been imposed upon which gives rise to complexities in the legal systems governing secured transactions and rendering them impractical and sometimes only one security device is introduced to fulfill all demands made by applicants throughout all sectors while this measure is taken with inclusiveness and flexibility. In this paper, the two mentioned approaches are called Pluralism and Unitarianism and by examining them in the two legal systems of the US and England, we’ve answered the question in the Iran’s law that whether with respect to the mortgage contract regulations in the Civil Code of Iran and other existing miscellaneous laws and rules, specifically in the banking field which is in a distance from the mortgage contract regulations, there are numerous means for collateralizing properties and hence the pluralism approach is dominant or whether all the subject matters are categorized under the same title and therefore the Unitarianism approach is dominant. The result is that in the United States legal system and within the framework of Article 9 UCC Unitarianism, and in the England system, with various devices of security, pluralism prevails. Mortgage contract is the only security device in our country’s legal system and all the regulations passed so far are in place to moderate the traditional rules governing this devices. Therefore, our country’s legal system’s position is Unitarianism. However, this state of Unitarianism is incomplete and limited and there should be created an inclusive and all-directional system for secured transactions by amending the existing regulations in order for optimizing the efficiency of the mentioned system.

---

Nowadays we can trace different types of legal regulative interactions when we are talking about all the relationship which is taking place - in part or whole - outside the territory of a nation-state. These communications are described by a group of the theorists Under title of  "Transnational Law Theory". The theory of transnational law as a theory with not a long history, has raised many issues. the evaluation of the theorethical basis for the emergence of transnational law and its implications are two important issues in the realm of study of the theory of transnational law, which provides the scholars with the two theoretical foundations necessary in this regard.
From the point of view of the theoretical foundations of the emergence of transnational law, it can be argued that transnational law has been influenced by two different factors, namely pluralism and universalism, both of which are the consequences of globalization.The theoretical foundations that explain how transnational law is conceptualized, can be regarded as the  ones of the most recent theoretical achievements of  law, which is an attempt to imprint the Patterns and Designs of transnational law. The richest and most powerful of these theoretical foundations can be considered in the school of legal positivism and legal sociology.

---

This study focuses on the significant lines of development characterizing the history of educational research methodology in Iran. A “historical case study” employed to collect, verify, and synthesize evidence about the same as such appeared in the Quarterly Journal of Education. The results indicated that the educational research in Iran has experienced five, distinct yet, overlapping and simultaneously operating historical moments. The first is the pre-methodology (1919- 1985) stage, during which scholars carried out their investigations without a distinct systematic scientific method. The second (1985- 1994) is a period of rising quantitative approach, during which quantitative methods were becoming central in the education field. The third (1995- 2004) is characterized by insistence on the monopoly of quantitative, during which educational and other social science researchers relied primarily on quantitative methods and statistical inference understood as a means to test the proposed hypotheses. The fourth (2005–2014), is a replacement stage started with the wave of qualitative taking over the traditional and provoked the appearance of a new hegemony. The concern for quality stage (2015-2019) is the fifth when the threat of losing credibility and leaving a relativistic impression were considered by members of the research community. It is concluded that Iran’s educational research urgently requires mobilized and rationalized methodological pluralism with the ultimate goal of improving on existing pedagogical practices. 

---

The concept of salvation is presented in different religions according to special principles. In Christianity, it is presented on the basis of Christian faith, and in Islam, it is presented within several concepts, but the most prominent of which is “najat” which is based on the faith that Islam calls for. From this view, the opinions of contemporary Arab thinkers differed toward varied religions and salvation. From this standpoint, the views of the most prominent contemporary Arab Christian and Muslim thinkers on the issue of salvation range between Inclusivism and exclusivism. Some of them adopt an Inclusivism vision and do not reject religious pluralism and believe in the possibility of salvation for followers of other religions, while others adopt an exclusive vision on the basis of which they reject the possibility of salvation for followers of other religions. Some of them do not believe in the possibility of salvation for followers of other sects that branch off from their religion. This article was conducted according to a descriptive analytical research method relying on library sources with the aim of exploring the opinions of the contemporary Iraqi thinker Dr. Abdul-Jabbar Al-Refae with a review of the opinions of some contemporary Arab thinkers regarding what was mentioned. The results indicated that he adopts an Inclusive vision in light of his belief in the breadth and universality of God’s mercy, and based on significant rational and religious evidence that proves the possibility of salvation for followers of other religions away from religious and sectarian fanaticism. He believes in the principle of pluralism of religions, so he calls for the necessity of respecting all religions and not underestimating their credos, and rejects “takfir” and doctrinal disputes that provoke hostility and hatred. However, there are others who hold an exclusive view based on their religious and sectarian fanaticism, relying only on religious evidence, some of which is shrouded in doubt in terms of historical support or whose significance does not amount to generalizing punishment to all human beings. Its implications can also be interpreted in another way such that its exclusivity at the level of salvation for followers of other religions is denied.