GOOGLE SEARCH
Google
USER LOGIN

Is there such a thing as a religious intellectual?

sadegh
by sadegh
13-Apr-2008
 

یکی از ویژگی‌های روشنفکر این است که نسبت به همه چیز شک می‌کند. اما یک فرد مذهبی خیلی از ارزش‌های انسانی را باور دارد، بدون هیچ شک و بدون هیچ پرسشی.  حالا این سوال پیش می‌آید که یک «روشنفکر مذهبی»، چه ویژگی‌هایی می‌تواند داشته باشد؟ چه حضور اجتماعی می‌تواند داشته باشد و این اصطلاح با توجه به ویژگی‌هایی که بین روشنفکر و فرد مذهبی در مفهوم و تعریف جهانی آن وجود دارد، آیا معنی دارد ؟

رامين جهانبگلو: من خودم درباره‌ی این موضوع خیلی بحث داشتم با روشنفکران دینی ایران و همانطور که همیشه گفتم، فکر می‌کنم که شما نمی‌توانید درباره‌ی روشنفکری دینی صحبت بکنید، والا مجبور هستید درباره‌ی نقاش دینی یا پیانیست دینی هم صحبت بکنید که بی‌معنی است اصلا. یعنی چه که یک کسی نقاش دینی است؟ من فکر می‌کنم که معنویت بسیار امر مهمی است در تاریخ بشری و اصولا در زندگی بشر خیلی نقش مهمی دارد. برای اینکه معنا می‌دهد به زندگی او و یک نوع جستجوی معناست و روشنفکران به دنبال جستجوی معنا هستند. ولی اگر روشنفکری بیاید و خودش را درگیر یک نوع ایدئولوژی دینی بکند و از قبل بگوید که من در حقیقت مفاهیم اجتماعی یا مفاهیم فکری را می‌خواهم در این یک قالب فقط ببینم و نه در قالب‌های دیگر؛ من فکر می‌کنم به یک نوعی از توسعه فکر نقادانه جلوگیری کرده برای خودش و برای دیگران. او به نوعی نمی‌تواند فراسوی مسائل را ببیند. یا مجبور می‌شود که همیشه آن مسائل را در قالبی که می‌خواهد فقط ببیند. و آنجا من فکر می‌کنم که روشنفکری باید یک حقیقت‌جویی آزاد باشد، بدون اینکه بگوید من به هیچ حقیقتی دست پیدا کردم و مطلق کردم آن را. وقتی یک حقیقت‌جویی مستمر و آزاد باشد، آنجاست که روشنفکری می‌تواند نقادانه باشد و روشنفکری می‌تواند متحول باشد و روشنفکری می‌تواند کمک کند به پیشرفت تاریخ بشر.

 

http://www.newsecularism.com/2008/0408-B/041408-Ramin-Jahanbeiglu.htm

Submit your writing to Iranian.com: log in or register
( filed under: )

Mehdi

Sadegh, you are absolutely

by Mehdi on

Sadegh, you are absolutely right. Short-sightedness can occur in any field, not just religion. It is a bit suspecious that such things are attacked these days only if they relate to religion. Could it be that it benefits some? Religion is intermixed with a lot of advancement in humanity. The fact is up until a couple of hundred years ago there was nothing else. There was no real science, and if there was any, it was all mixed with philosophy and religion, etc. Even today, these terms are not defined universally, so how could anyone say anything about them without first defining them?

During the process of evolving, mankind makes some mistakes. One shouldn't condemn all progress just because sometimes there are mistakes made.


sadegh

Thanks Mehdi. True, but you

by sadegh on

Thanks Mehdi. True, but you could also be a god-denying communist and fit the same profile; Stalin, Mao, Kim Jong-il, ex-Trotskyite neocons etc...It's a matter of unquestioned fidelity to a particular world-view or ideology, which has no room for query or question...'Religion' in the sense outlined by Jahanbegloo and the interviewer is merely one manifestation of a broader phenonmenon in my view. And in any case 'religion' is a straw man as cast in the interview. One can't pigeon-hole religious thinkers in such a manner...contributions to human thought, art and genius haven't been solely the province of secularists. In fact the direct opposite of this seems to be true. Pascal, Augustine, Aquinas and Plato are as important as Freud, Marx and Nietzsche, and in the Iranian case the importance of Soroush on the one hand and Kasravi on the other is undeniable; both have made essential contributions to the development of the human spirit. 


Mehdi

Definitions

by Mehdi on

This discussion gets stuck in the fact that many of these definitions are not universally accepted. What is religion? What is intellectual? These are open to interpretations. Some consider Buddhism a religion and some don't. But it is quite clear to see that when someone has already made up his mind about something, he will not be an explorer in that field. When someone considers that he knows everything there is to know about a subject, he looses his ability to learn anything about that subject.


sadegh

He of course has a point

by sadegh on

He of course has a point, a very important one in fact. That nothwithstanding, I think it's fair to say that he grossly oversimplifies the matter. His analogy is also very weak, and simply doesn't hold water under scrutiny.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <i> <b> <ul> <ol> <li> <p> <br> <strong> <em>
  • You may insert videos with [video:URL]

More information about formatting options

Captcha
To post your comment you must answer math question below. This step is necessary to block spammers.
six + six =
Solve this math question and enter the solution with digits. E.g. for "two plus four = ?" enter "6".

MOST DISCUSSED
TitleDateComments
Normal peopleJul 20127
Why am I not joining NIAC?Jul 1681
Being thereJul 1467
Where it hurtsJul 1659
Shooting at close rangeJul 2256

IRANIANS OF THE DAY
PersonAboutDay
Donya BonyadiOpera singerJul 23
Behnam GeramiBartender masters art of booze jugglingJul 22
Agha BahramKabab Koobideh expertJul 21
Ziba Shirazi"Return to my homeland"Jul 21
Mansour MatloubiProfessional poker playerJul 18
Elaheh SeifolmolookMistress of HennaJul 18
Fe ZandiFashion designerJul 17
Lili Dehghani Participating in Canadian Idol, singing Amazing GraceJul 17
Ali PourgolMy father, a great teacher and authorJul 17
Shahab TolouieFlamenco player and singer in Prague performs in a synagogue Jul 17