it was in (was)

it was in (was)
it was in (was)
I go back from time to time to the books that I bought during my university studies, or that were distributed by the university when books were distributed to us for free, and the last time it came to my attention that there were several books on “intellectual conquest”; To remind me of Susan Langer’s idea that some ideas, at a certain stage, impose themselves on the intellectual and cultural scene with great force, and these are ideas that seem to the individuals of that stage to solve basic problems and clarify ambiguous issues. Most of them welcome these ideas.

In this context, we can see the “intellectual invasion” as the concept that traditional currents resorted to as a system of ideas and formulas to justify their stand against social and cultural modernization. The meaning of the concept is that there is a war of ideas waged by the West that must be confronted, and thus social and cultural modernization has become just an alienating idea. The goal is for society to remain as it is without development or change.

The intellectual invasion was the biggest encouragement to the issuance of naive and superficial books for those who write to preserve the “nation” from the intellectual invasion, and an obstacle between issuing discreet and calm books as it should be. It was printed in large quantities, and at the expense of charitable institutions, businessmen, or publishing houses specialized in these books, which they called “the Islamic book.” It is mostly distributed free of charge, and in general it implicitly focuses on the writer’s relationship with an audience that consumes these books, such as youth and women, and they are usually Existing in patient waiting rooms in a hospital, or waiting for customers in a barber shop, or auditors in a government institution, and they are nothing more than records with the violators of what their authors see, moral judgments, and dealing with modern concepts within the framework of rejection after they empty them of their cognitive content and turn them into accusations ready; Modernity, for example, is nothing more than an intellectual invasion, and the modernists have relations with foreign parties, and they are a thorn in the side of the Muslim community. Thus, the relationship of such books with their readers is a relationship of warning that the writers who are inserted in honey.

Eliot defined culture as “what makes life worth living,” and it is indeed so, but they believe that culture is what makes the afterlife worth living. Therefore, the culture presented by these books is the culture of death, and even books that discuss a literary issue do not stop reminding of the afterlife from time to time, that today is work and tomorrow is reckoning, and that what enters into reckoning is wasting time reading modernist literature of all kinds, such as poetry, stories and novels, and that His authorship of the book is a victory for religion, and he hopes that he will be rewarded for it on the Day of Judgment.

Of course, if these authors believed in these ideas, without believing that it is the one and only truth, I would not have discussed it with them. What I am discussing here is that they want to impose it on others, because they are the ones who possess the truth and others have only to submit to it. These people do not see Any room for multiplicity of opinions and their differences, rather they believe that there is one opinion that is the truth, and the rest of the opinions are not right, and they are false and incorrect.

Any deep understanding of culture requires that it be understood in the way it operates, and the cultural method is necessarily a democratic process even in non-democratic societies (Edward Said); In order for members of society to reach what they consider to be culture, they must select cultural elements that become part of the culture adopted in society. These elements are subject to constant review, elements disappear from them, and other elements are added to them. They inherited it from their ancestors, rather they add to it, and remove from it, as heritage drops every passing thing, and so does culture.

In every culture there are many ideas of truth, good, evil, and beauty; They are values ​​that may exist in one society and not in another society, in addition to that, the society’s culture may determine from time to time the enemy and the friend, and the right, as Elliott says with regard to culture. It is always about to be imagined, but it is never certain. We cannot neglect the word (loss) when we talk about cultural conflict. Loss occurs among conservatives and traditionalists when people abandon old patterns of thinking, convictions, customs, and norms, and replace them with new patterns of thinking.

The experiences of ancient societies on the frontiers of modernity are disintegration, anxiety, collapse, and reconstruction, which is a real loss for traditionalists and conservatives, especially in societies in which religion is an essential determinant. The Iranian thinker Shayegan calls this stage between, that is, traditional values ​​that are fading away, and other values ​​that have not crystallized. After, and it is a dangerous stage in the life of societies, in which what Shaiqan calls the Frankish monster emerges. The traditionalists saw that the traditional culture is disintegrating, and they believed that what disintegrated is the culture that should speak in the name of society, which expresses the will and emotions of the members of society, they thought that What has been disintegrated is the basic culture of society, and the references from which the individual in Saudi society derives what should be said and what should not be said.