Discourse on Method
1
In my previous post on “zero privilege” I mentioned that "the western culture is an organic whole and in order to acquire one part of it, we have to accept other parts as well”. I think this statement is too vague to be defendable and useful. In that post, I was trying to understand the essential element(s) of the modern western culture and to examine the kind of association between these elements. If I find an imperative associate between these elements, I refer them as an organic whole and a package deal.
2
I think there is confusion among Iranians (including me) in their discourse on modernization. Iranian intellectuals started pondering on modernization when they found their culture dysfunctional in confrontation with Europeans. Accordingly, it seems to be normal to use terms such as “westernization” and “modernization” instead of talking about the “exact nature of Iranian cultural problem” and the “exact nature of Iranians’ desired/alternative culture”. In order to revise our methodology on this issue (which is the most important issue for Iranian intellectuals), I think we have to clarify: A) what are the Xs’ we want to achieve? B) Why do we want to achieve Xs’?
A) By saying that we want to be “modern”, we are not giving any defined information about what we want. We have to pin point what we want to gain in our cultural/social strive; democracy? Economic prosperity? Or social order? If we define our Xs’, we don’t need to talk about vague concepts such as modernity or tradition as our goal, and we will switch the discourse from “modernization” to X-ization (i.e. “Democratization”, “liberalization”, etc.)
B) We have to clarify the reason we are interest in the Xs’. Are we interested in democracy since it is the dominant political paradigm of the day (and we have to accept it even if we don’t like it) or because it is desirable for us? If the acquired Xs’ are also desirable for us, we don’t have to talk about unclear concepts of the west and westernization, and we will again switch the discourse from “westernization” to X-ization.
3
We have to clarify the “imperative condition for the possibility of Xs" as well. What are the imperative “states of mind” and “states of affair” for our desired/doomed Xs’? Are they just historically associated or imperatively related? For example, if our desired/doomed X is democracy, is it necessarily associated with religious tolerance (sate of mind) or free trade (state of affair)? Or are they just possible routs to democracy?
In my previous post on “zero privilege” I mentioned that "the western culture is an organic whole and in order to acquire one part of it, we have to accept other parts as well”. I think this statement is too vague to be defendable and useful. In that post, I was trying to understand the essential element(s) of the modern western culture and to examine the kind of association between these elements. If I find an imperative associate between these elements, I refer them as an organic whole and a package deal.
2
I think there is confusion among Iranians (including me) in their discourse on modernization. Iranian intellectuals started pondering on modernization when they found their culture dysfunctional in confrontation with Europeans. Accordingly, it seems to be normal to use terms such as “westernization” and “modernization” instead of talking about the “exact nature of Iranian cultural problem” and the “exact nature of Iranians’ desired/alternative culture”. In order to revise our methodology on this issue (which is the most important issue for Iranian intellectuals), I think we have to clarify: A) what are the Xs’ we want to achieve? B) Why do we want to achieve Xs’?
A) By saying that we want to be “modern”, we are not giving any defined information about what we want. We have to pin point what we want to gain in our cultural/social strive; democracy? Economic prosperity? Or social order? If we define our Xs’, we don’t need to talk about vague concepts such as modernity or tradition as our goal, and we will switch the discourse from “modernization” to X-ization (i.e. “Democratization”, “liberalization”, etc.)
B) We have to clarify the reason we are interest in the Xs’. Are we interested in democracy since it is the dominant political paradigm of the day (and we have to accept it even if we don’t like it) or because it is desirable for us? If the acquired Xs’ are also desirable for us, we don’t have to talk about unclear concepts of the west and westernization, and we will again switch the discourse from “westernization” to X-ization.
3
We have to clarify the “imperative condition for the possibility of Xs" as well. What are the imperative “states of mind” and “states of affair” for our desired/doomed Xs’? Are they just historically associated or imperatively related? For example, if our desired/doomed X is democracy, is it necessarily associated with religious tolerance (sate of mind) or free trade (state of affair)? Or are they just possible routs to democracy?
posted by Homonomos at 5:31 PM
<< Home