The Idea
The text emphasizes that critiquing modernity does not mean rejecting it or turning away from it. The issue is not to abolish its achievements, but to approach it as an unfinished project that requires reassessment. With this position, the text rejects the view that makes modernity an ultimate solution, and it also rejects the stance that dismisses it entirely. It is a reformist critique, not an all-encompassing break.
Concise Formulation
Critique of modernity: does not entail rejecting it
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim defines the direction of the book’s argument and prevents a misunderstanding of Arkoun’s position. It places critique within the horizon of benefiting from modernity rather than outside it, and makes revision a condition for the continuation of the project, not its negation. For this reason, this statement functions as an interpretive rule through which the rest of the book’s critical positions can be read, without turning them into a wholesale rejection.
Why It Matters
The importance of this claim lies in the fact that it clarifies the balanced character of Arkoun’s reading of modernity. He does not call for a return to the past, nor does he surrender the present to itself without scrutiny. This helps us understand him as a thinker who seeks to correct the course rather than demolish it, and to broaden the horizon of modernity rather than abolish it.
Brief Evidence
and criticizing it does not mean rejecting its gains or turning away from them Arkoun brings his position on modernity closer to Habermas’s position: modernity is an unfinished project,
Reading Questions
- Why does the text insist that critique is not the same as rejection?
- How does this position help us understand Arkoun’s entire project?
Documentation Level
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book material.