The “Sociology of Stratification and Social Inequalities by Rasoul Rabani and Abraham Ansari was evaluated to improve human science resources. Of the book advantages are the study of social inequalities dimensions including such subjects as women and social stratum, religions and social stratum, ethnics and social inequalities, policy and social stratum as well as two chapters which deal with the case study of middle class in Iran and the USA. The formal generality factors have not been regarded as an educational book in university. The formal and content evaluation show that this book does not  meet the needs of a scientific society in sociology of stratum and social inequalities field despite of the third edition because the book is not problem-oriented; it has no theoretical presupposition and methodology, and its content has not been arranged around a main question, and if the book is subject–oriented, it is not an educational and scientific book, so it looks more like a collection of articles. 

Mannheim’s purpose in writing Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge was indeed to project the basic principles of sociology of knowledge. The fundamental question for him was about the problem of “how men think”. In his book, he argues the way of thinking by people, especially the intellectuals, in a socio-historical context within which the thoughts take place. So, his book has been the product of the critical historical duration, especially in the agitating time of Hungary and Germany during the years between the two world Wars and the time of Fascism power in Europe. He attempts to find the way of thinking and cognition, but he cannot emancipate from the conditions of thinking crisis in that time. However, he migrates from his home to Germany, and then to Britain under such unfavorable circumstances. Some readers emphasize that this Mannheim’s book is a philosophical work, while he believes that he has attempted to introduce the principles of thinking and knowledge and with his attention to the relation between thought and the socio-historical conditions (as relationism in Mannheim word), he feels that he is keeping distance from philosophy.

The purpose of this paper is to critically evaluate the book "Capitalism, Family and Personal Life." The author's question is how capitalism and feminism differentiate between two public and private spheres in the family. The researcher has come up with a part of the criticism by matching the translated text with the original text and looking at the sources of the subject. Then, by examining the text of the interpreter, she criticized the other part. But in general, the critical thinking method has been used to evaluate the book. The researcher's evaluation showed that, despite the complexity of the original text, the interpreter has provided a thorough and psychological translation of the book; nevertheless, given the fact that it was translated and published in Iran, it would have been better for the translator to include some differences  in the footnotes about the West, the Iranian community, and Eastern societies. Despite the historical importance of the present book, given the content problems, methodological problems, facial problems and its very incomplete translation from the original text in Persian, it does not seem to suggest that a suitable source, as a textbook, be offered to students. If this book is supposed to be introduced at university, it needs major reforms.

The aim of this article is to critically evaluate Sociology of Revolution and Social Revolutions written by Mohamad Taghi Sabzeie. The author attempts to provide a book for sociology of revolution. In this book, at first, the concept of revolution and similar concepts like coup, riot, and social movement have been raised. Second, the process of revolution’s elements (ideology, mobilization, organizing and leadership) was taken into consideration. Then the author deals with the explanation of revolution. In this work, after mentioning the process and explanation of revolution, the consequences of revolution (social changes in post revolution society) have been raised. Finally, in the last chapter, different kinds of revolution like republican, communist, etc. are examined. The most important outcome of thecritical evaluation of this work with respect to the format is the loss of proper equivalence for English words. With regard to the content the loss of logical coherence is observed. At last, the author’s main objectives, which include offering theories about the revolution and paying attention to social revolutions, are not met which the main shortcomings of the present book.

Academic classrooms and the lived experience of university professors have been a major concern for many academic, educational, and training systems in Iran and elsewhere in the world. The importance and necessity of addressing classroom space are a valuable realm that can provide a variety of challenges for education experts and managers. Therefore, in this essay, the book "A Narrative of Academic Classrooms: The Lived Experience of University Professors" was attempted by Abbas Kazemi from the Institute for Cultural and Social Studies published in 1396.  Using descriptive-analytic analysis, the purpose of the present review is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the book and make it more useful for the subsequent editions without any bias.  First, his work was introduced, and then the book was criticized in two aspects of form and content. At the end of the critique, the rational communication approach is considered as a communicative channel for the classroom with the argument that it can take a deeper look at the learning process. In the end, , suggestions are made to eliminate the shortcomings of this work. 

The purpose of this paper is, in particular, to understand and evaluate Robert Dahl and Brackner's book, modern political analysis and in general, to provide a framework for analyzing a text. Today, the conventional way of examining a text with false assumptions, which actually lead to a lack of understanding and evaluation, is to presuppose definitions of understanding and evaluation, attention to semantic dimensions, and emphasis on face and content evaluation. But, is it really possible to evaluate without understanding the work? The main reasoning behind this article is that the conditions for the possibility of understanding and evaluating a piece of work, based on this assumption, are that understanding and evaluation are inextricably bound. The context of understanding requires the return of the text to the historical context and the context of the evaluation involves the propositional content. The result of the application of this interconnectedness is that the work has been written in the political atmosphere of "democracy" and "behaviorist" science. The verbs contained in the speech initially confirm the behavioral-oriented monistic methodology, then change into pluralistic affiliation. An increasing propositional content represents innovation in the thematic, political, and methodological context. Decreasing propositional content points to problems in the methodological domain of political sciences. For example, it is not able to provide a valid argument about how to obtain normative propositions from the empirical methods of studying the historical and metaphysical values. Therefore, the understanding and appraisal of political phenomena require Robert Dahl's methodological adjustments.

The present critique aims to review  form, content and techniques of the book entitled Sociology and Education based on theoretical fields and current scientificly accepted standards about the functions and desirable features of a University technical textbook. Findings of this research suggest that this book, in terms of criteria mentioned before, is of fairly good quality. Yet, it is necessary to add some issues in the field of methodology in Sociology of Education and create an enhanced social personality in students, social structure of education and so on to this book. Also, the inclusion of a summary of the important issues by asking questions to develop the thinking and searching of the audience and adding a list of new and upcoming books and resources related to the contents of each chapter at the end of the chapterss can add to the attractiveness and richness of the book's contents. In addition, it is necessary to devote part of the contents of each chapter to the present and future of the Iranian education.

This book follows a political development in the Middle East. After World War II, at the time of the U.S. investments in Europe and the third world countries, development became a subject of study in social sciences.  According to Modernization Theories, political development should follow economic and cultural developments. Mostly at this phase, Islamic societies resist development because of its secular, humanist, and experimental sciences bases.  Thereby, development confronts challenges in Islamic countries.  Articles of this book explain hardships of liberal democracy in Islamic countries and suggest some solutions.  They believe there should be negotiations between Iran and the U.S., the top powers of the region, in order to avoid conflicts. Other suggestions are the interpretation of religious texts according to liberal principles, promotion of gender equality, and enhancement of women's' participation in social life. 

Poverty and inequality in Iran are two important phenomena the depth and breadth of which have attracted the attention of social and economic thinkers and have been studied from various perspectives. "The Necessity of Fighting Poverty and Inequality in Iran" by Saeed Madani Qahfarhchi is one of these research findings. Reviewing and criticizing these studies are a necessary prerequisite for defining literature on poverty and inequality in Iran. From the methodological point of view, the present paper criticizes this book and provides some theoretical imperatives and a way to complete it. In a critique, this article is not seen as a defect, which provides some suggestions for the completion of this project with an empathetic attitude. After the introduction of the effect of some shortcomings, the chapters of the book are discussed, and in the next step, the systematic analysis of the methodological, theoretical, and epistemological perceptions of the book is introduced. The result of this article is that the approach of the book is more descriptive and does not provide an explanation of poverty in Iran. Accordingly, the book does not introduce the category of inequality and its causes and reasons in Iran. The lack of a deliberate look and a definite stance on poverty and inequality in this book is one of the main points that this article emphasizes.

Many of the research works on the Iranian history and culture, while embracing the theory of Oriental Despotism, regard despotism as a feature of Iranian society, and they believe that during the history of Iran, the shadow of tyranny has always been widespread in all social areas of the Iranian community. This discourse has considered a decisive role for the government and the institution of politics in the Iranian history and believes that despotism in Iran has prevented the formation of civil and guild organizations. This article tries to criticize this discourse with a descriptive-analytical approach with the library method as well as the study of non-Iranian writings. According to the research findings, the structure of the market institutions, religious institutions, social strata and tribal status in the Iranian society show that the Iranian despotism theory is rooted in the meta-narratives or the great theory of Oriental Despotism and Asian Production which does not correspond to the historical facts of Iran.