Rereading of falsifibility of two main hypotheses regarding Rostam al-Tawarikh

Abstract

The purpose of writing this article is to test two prominent hypotheses about Rostam al-Tawarikh by the method of falsifiability. Rustam Alhokma is one of the historians that so far, there have been Paradoxical judgments about his personality and Type of historiography; As some historians have considered his works, especially Rostam al-Tawarikh, as an example of "illusion" and "delusion", On the contrary, a number of political scientists have included him a thinker that Some of the basic ideas in the future Constitutional Revolution such as "secularization" and "care for the masses " was placed in his works. The author has tried to test the above contradictory hypotheses by using the method of falsifiability and evaluating their scientificity from the perspective of this method. The author has made it clear that the first hypothesis is formulated by the inductive method and is valid within the framework of this method, but from the point of view of a historical refutation, it is a "falsifiable" hypothesis. However, due to the anachronistic nature and lack of propositions that support that hypothesis, the second hypothesis is irrefutable from the point of view of the Popper method and therefore unscientific.

Keywords

• falsifiability method
• karl popper
• inductive method
• rostam al-tawarikh
• rustam alhokama