Idea
Arkoun sees the dominance of techno-scientific reason in the West as having narrowed the space for imagination, poetry, and philosophy, and weakened the presence of religious and metaphysical questions in the public sphere. The point is not to deny the value of science, but to warn that when knowledge is confined to what is useful and practical, it loses part of its capacity to ask the great questions of meaning, existence, and the human being.
Condensed formulation
Techno-scientific reason: marginalizes poetry, imagination, philosophy, and religious questions
Its place in the book’s argument
This claim serves the book’s argument because it shows that Arkoun’s critique is not limited to the Islamic world, but extends also to the model of Western modernity. In this way, the text does not appear as a defense of tradition against the West, but as an objection to every form of epistemic closure. For him, the equation is broader than the binary of tradition and modernity, and includes a critique of the dominant reason itself.
Why it matters
The importance of this claim is that it makes clear that Arkoun does not want to replace one hegemony with another, but calls for a wider space for the human being. Through it, we understand that his interest in philosophy, religion, and imagination is not cultural nostalgia, but a defense of the full human experience. This helps us read his project as a critique of the limits of a single reason.
Brief evidence
Criticizes the ascendancy of techno-scientific reason in the West Criticizes the ascendancy of techno-scientific reason in the West, and sees it as having marginalized poetry and imagination
Reading questions
- Does Arkoun criticize science itself, or the dominance of a single mode of reason?
- What does the human being lose when poetic and religious questions are marginalized?
Degree of documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear passage of the book’s material.