Johann P. Arnason, Civilizations In Dispute: Historical Questions and Theoretical Traditions, Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2003 (original) (raw)
Related papers
2023
This extremely valuable collection is based in part on a virtual conference organised by Ĺubomír Dunaj in Vienna in 2021 to mark Jóhann Á rnason's 80th birthday. The contributors have all engaged (in many cases very closely) with Á rnason's work over the past years, and they bring to the book a wide variety of critical perspectives and possible extensions of it. Á rnason is one of those theorists who turns up in many different contexts: critical theory, on which he wrote his first book (1971) and most recently in this journal (2023), and the theorisation of state socialism, under which he had lived in the 1960s (1993) 1 and of European integration (2019). The core of his work is a distinctive conception of human civilisations, involving the interplay of culture and power, which he has developed in a wide variety of historical and geographical frames and presented most fully in Á rnason (2003). Reworking Karl Jaspers' (1953) conception of the Achsenzeit or Axial Age around 500 BCE, in his recent work Á rnason has looked even further back and also engaged closely with anthropology, notably in a co-edited book focused on Eurasia. 2 As Axel Honneth notes in his preface to the present book (p. 2), Á rnason moved. .. away from the premises of the Habermasian theory according to which social development depends primarily upon world-historical rationalizing processes. .. [to]. .. an alternative conception: it is the specific world-interpretation of a given cultural and civilizational space that first decides what. .. counts as increasing rational knowledge-and thus what should be understood as 'rationalization' in the first place. In the first chapter following Dunaj's Introduction, Suzi Adams, who has thoroughly explored Á rnason's project in her own work and in interviews with him, discusses his conception of the political in relation to Karel Kosík, Marcel Gauchet, Cornelius Castoriadis and Jan Patočka. (This list of names gives an idea of Á rnason's typically wide range of reference.) JiřiŠubrt, who had founded with Á rnason a programme in historical sociology at Charles University in Prague, contrasts historical sociology with social constructionism and thus implicitly raises a question which runs through the book as a whole: should comparative and historical sociology be seen, as it standardly is, as a sub-variant of
Comments on “Civilizational Analysis and Paths Not Taken”
Comparative Civilizations Review, 2017
Vorbemerkung to collected essays on the sociology of religion. This text outlines a comparative perspective still relevant to civilizational studies. Given the recurrent attacks on Weber as a "Eurocentric," it is worth reiterating the points that most effectively disprove this claim. Weber's analysis of the path taken by the Occident focuses on a "concatenation of circumstances," not on any foundational cultural traits or inherent developmental logic. The circumstances are, as a closer look at Weber's comparative studies shows, of multiple kinds: environmental, geopolitical, institutional and cultural. As for the long-term trends, the main emphasis is on rationalizing transformations, but not in a way that would reduce or subordinate history to an evolution of rationality.
Civilization, Modernity, and Critique Engaging Jóhann P. Árnason’s Macro-Social Theory
Routledge, 2023
Civilization, Modernity, and Critique provides the first comprehensive, cutting-edge engagement with the work of one of the most foundational figures in civilizational analysis: Johann P. Árnason. In order to do justice to Árnason's seminal and wide-ranging contributions to sociology, social theory and history, it brings together distinguished scholars from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds and geographical contexts. Through a critical, interdisciplinary dialogue, it offers an enrichment and expansion of the methodological, theoretical, and applicative scope of civilizational analysis, by addressing some of the most complex and pressing problems of contemporary global society. A unique and timely contribution to the ongoing task of advancing the project of a critical theory of society, this volume will appeal to scholars of sociology and social theory with interests in historical sociology, critical theory and civilizational analysis.
Galactical Civilizational Expansion, Intercivilizational Crossroads and Glocalization, 2024
Civilizations tend to expand "galactically", that is translocally and transregionally in uneven ways, impacting social relations and practices far beyond their core. Such a tendency to expand unevenly and comprise several societies and networks was already recognized by the founding fathers of sociology and anthropology and has been further developed in recent decades. This chapter suggests that while civilizations are often studied on their own, it is of utmost relevance to study intercivilizational crossroads and arenas of glocalization at various historical junctures. It is at these crossroads and arenas of glocalization that social, cultural and political carriers project, adopt, negotiate or resist ideas and practices. The text focuses on several types of agents or drivers operating these intercivilizational dynamics, singling out nomads, advancing conquerors, settlers, exiles and migrants, radical wanderers, transnational sojourners and members of diasporas. Analysis points out the impact that these agents have played intertwining and 'glocalizing' belief systems, institutions and culture at different historical junctures.
‘Civilization’ and its subalterns
Review of International Studies, 2017
This article reviews Andrew Linklater’s Violence and Civilization in the Western States-Systems. Focusing upon the book’s explanation of the ‘European civilizing process’ in the modern era, it suggests that the account is limited by ‘civilizational isolationism’ and ‘metrocentric diffusion’. These analytic operations serve to minimise the agency and contributions of non-Western, colonial, and postcolonial actors to the global civilizing process. The occlusion of such agency and contributions, however, are not specific to this work, but reflect broader limitations in historical sociology writ large.
Oblivion of Origins: On Hegemonic Universals and Hybrid Civilizations
This paper will argue theses such as “end of history” and “clash of civilizations” report a continued oblivion—indeed a repression of memory—about the hybrid origins of western civilization. “Orientalizing” the Other —marking the other as an unknown — is an effect of paradigmatic, categorical knowledge, and that it is inevitable at the moment of projecting one’s own culturally conditioned knowledge on to what is not known. The East rises to importance for the West as Europe wishes to distance herself from Asia. Since finding a point of absolute demarcation is impossible, the Orient imposes itself as an incomprehensible knowledge bit that can only be approached through comparison to Europe. Such an approach disregards the “accidental” historical ascension of Northwest Europe to a privileged economic, political, cultural, and military position. As such, the West’s universalizing knowledge gained the form of hegemonic globalization. The historical movement captured through a new anthropology has continued to our day in the form of cultural diversity and multiculturalism which are indications of our late modern era in which plurality without a centre encroaches upon every normative aspect of life. No longer can such colonial ideals as progress or security justify cultural homogenization, nor science’s normative social effect be taken as the ultimate measure for the quality of life. Postcolonial knowledge, feminism and women’s movements, issues of sexual preference, the rise of aboriginal and indigenous peoples, or the creative resistances of the poor all attest to the changing course of our societies. The response to the “clash of civilization” thesis, which stems from a certain “politics of immanence,” which makes undemocratic conduct possible, is a “politics of transcendence,” to whom democratic conduct owes its manifestation.
The study of the forms of society, culture, polity, religion and economy that ordinarily envelop human beings throughout their lives is an integral part of historically informed social analysis. This tradition of analysis stems back to the ancient scholars of war -Thucydides -and geoculture -Herodotus, gaining new impetus with the study of industrial capitalist societies (Marx and Weber), the rise and overthrow of noble or decadent values (Nietzsche) and, more recently, the formation of nation-states and nationalism. The comparative and historical analysis of the different ways in which Heidegger's 'being-in-the-world' can be understood has been a central tenet of social analysis oriented towards conceptualizing the deeply historical, social nature of being (ontos). To be human is, as Aristotle first observed, to give expression to our essentially gregarious nature as mediated and realized through various forms of social intercourse, deliberation and institutionalization. This gregariousness takes on various colourations according to time, space, symbolism, corporeality, affect structures and long-term social learning processes. The complex ways in which the latter perform their work to produce the interesting human being 1 may be denoted as a civilizational complex. In this chapter, I will expound upon different aspects and conceptions of this complex, discussing the necessity to conceive of late modern individuals (and social forms) within the parameters of a civilization-analytic framework. The comparative dimension of this discussion will serve to also highlight the heuristic value of conceiving of social life in all its multifarious forms, particularly when the person is now constantly subjected to media-saturated images of 'globalization' that misleadingly suggest the overcoming of diverse civilizational lineages, that is, cultural traditions.
Modernity, Civilization and the Return to History [abstract + other scholars' comments]
A truly innovative and original work, comprehensive, balanced, and relevant to any investigation into and understanding of modernity. The author does a remarkable job of drawing from Western and Islamicate philosophy in a comprehensive and rigorous manner that exposes the reader to an intense, descriptive analysis of the problems encountered in interpreting history. His methodology is cohesive, and the evidence adds to the high quality of his argument...[O]ne of the most scholastic and ambitious undertakings I have ever encountered, extremely well-written...I stand in admiration of this work. The students of history, philosophy, theology, and religious studies would have a deep interest in this book. Geran F. Dodson University of North Georgia This fascinating book adopts a radically interdisciplinary approach in order to sort out modernity by questioning that which we call philosophy...delighted by the wealth of insights and connections unraveled by the author...genius. Mohammad Azadpur Professor of Philosophy San Francisco State University Anthony Shaker has written an extrordinary rich book exploring modernity, tradition and civilization. Drawing on the learned tradition of Islamdom as well as the work of Qunavi, but also many others, Shaker identifies the pitfalls of thinking about tradition and modernity in isomorphic terms. There is more to Islam than merely text. He draws our attention to personhood, history and the project of civility and shows a hopeful path forward. This is compulsory reading for anyone who agonizes about the world we are living in and seeks inspiration from the past that can be usefully used in the present. Ebrahim Moosa Professor of Islamic Studies Keough School of Global Affairs University of Notre Dame Digging deep into the roots of our modern ideas of civilization..., Shaker says ‘what we call modernity cannot be fathomed without making [the] historical connection’ between our times and ‘the spirit of scientific investigation associated with a self-conscious Islamicate civilization...’ This is not a book for casual reading. [But] despite some of the material being beyond my own scholarship, it is not at all difficult to see that the approach of the book is unique, that the level of inquiry and argument is clear, concise, and well-supported by source material. It’s certainly clear enough for me that I was able to follow the argument...I recommend it highly...This truly is a monumental work, and so far as I know there is no comparable work. I really do think this is a work of genius. Paul Richard Harris, Editor Axis of Logic Abstract The modern concept and study of civilization have their roots, not in western Europe, but in the long tradition of scientific and philosophic inquiry that began in a self-conscious Islamicate civilization. They emerged—as Heidegger would say—within a “region of being” proper to systematic science. Western European thought has introduced new elements that have completely altered how collective and personal identities are conceived and experienced. In this age of “globalization,” expressions of identity (individual, social and cultural) survive precariously outside their former boundaries, and humanity faces numerous challenges—environmental degradation, policy inertia, interstate bellicosity, cultural rivalries. Yet, the world has been globalized for at least a millennium, a fact partially obscured by the threadbare but widespread belief that modernity is a product of something called the West. One is thus justified in asking, as many people do today, if humanity has not lost its initiative. This is not a historical, a sociological or an empirical question, but fundamentally a philosophical one. The modern concepts of identity and personhood have come under heavy scrutiny because there can be no human initiative without the human agency that flows from them. Given their present inscrutability, and at the same time profound importance to us, Dr. Shaker brings to bear a wealth of original sources from both German thought and Ḥikmah (Islamicate philosophy), the latter based on material previously unavailable to scholars. He shows why posing the age-old question of identity anew in the light of these two traditions, whose special place in history is assured, can help clear the confusion surrounding modernity and civilization—i.e., the way we, the acting subject, live and deliberate on the present and the past. Proximity to Scholasticism, and therefore Islamicate philosophy, lends German thought up to Heidegger a unique ability to dialogue with Ḥikmah, as scholars since Max Horten and Henry Corbin (the first French translator of Heidegger’s Sein und Zeit) have been discovering. Two fecund elements common to Heidegger, Qūnawī and Mullā Ṣadrā are of special importance: logos (utterance and speech) as the structural embodiment of the primary meaning of a thing, and the unity-in-difference that Ṣadrā finally formulated as the substantial movement of existentiation. Heidegger, who occupies a good portion of this study, questioned modern ontology at a time of social collapse and deep spiritual crisis not unlike ours. Yet, that period also saw the greatest breakthroughs in modern physics and social science. With the waning of the old naïvetés of biologism, psychologism and social evolutionism, our very conception of time and space as measurable determinations was overturned. Dr. Shaker thus concludes with a few chapters on the theme of identity renewal in Western literature and Muslim “reformism.” The roots of the latter point to a civilizational point of convergence between the Eurocentric worldview, which provides the secular aesthetics roots of modernism, and an intellectual current originating in Ibn Taymiyyah’s epistemological reductionism. Both expressed the longing for pristine origin in a historical “golden age,” an obvious deformation of the commanding, creative oneness of being that has guided thought for millennia.
Civilizational Analysis and Paths Not Taken, Part II: The Great Divergence
Comparative Civilizations Review, 2017
In Part I of this essay, I sketched an overview of several contrasting approaches to civilizational analysis. I also pointed out that Europe from the twelfth century onward underwent a revolutionary transformation that set it apart from all other civilizations. The present discussion presents the analysis that follows from that background and the insights of Max Weber's "Preface" to his Collected Essays in the Sociology of Religion (1920). It assumes the plural conception of civilizations pioneered by Durkheim, Mauss, and Benjamin Nelson.1 The intent of the discussion is to show how very different civilizational development turned out in three civilizations, even with the mediating intervention of direct encounters.The first encounter was between Byzantium (Greek/Roman) civilization and Islamic civilization during the 8th and 9th centuries; the second encounter focuses on the 12th century interaction between Islam and the West; and the third, the 17th century encounter...