Journals / Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 15

On the Multiple Epistemologies of Secularism

Sekülerizmin Çoklu Epistemolojileri Üzerine

Pages
165–190
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Although this limited article does not aim to provide full- fledged political economy critique on the issue, it nevertheless points out the direction such critique would have to take, by way of taking up the issue of secularism as inherently related to the consolidation of World—Economy, and approaching secularism as the episteme of the tools, in the politico—ideological realm, of the capitalist system, of both legitimacy and critique.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The article approaches the issue of secularism, taking it as the ontological and epistemelogical basis of European Enlightenment, from the point of relations amongst capitalism—liberalism—democracy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It builds the approach by way of expressing the differences in the nature, meanings (i.e. as an issue of Western style colonial imposition or an issue of worldview, institutional mechanism and national sovereignty) and development of secularism in the Western context and the Ottoman—inherited Middle Eastern context.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Although this limited article does not aim to provide full- fledged political economy critique on the issue, it nevertheless points out the direction such critique would have to take, by way of taking up the issue of secularism as inherently related to the consolidation of World—Economy, and approaching secularism as the episteme of the tools, in the politico—ideological realm, of the capitalist system, of both legitimacy and critique.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The article approaches the issue of secularism, taking it as the ontological and epistemelogical basis of European Enlightenment, from the point of relations amongst capitalism—liberalism—democracy. It builds the approach by way of expressing the differences in the nature, meanings (i.e. as an issue of Western style colonial imposition or an issue of worldview, institutional mechanism and national sovereignty) and development of secularism in the Western context and the Ottoman—inherited Middle Eastern context. Later, while the article draws attention to secularism in the neoliberal age of historical capitalism, it critically examines the differing positions of Western and Middle Eastern intellectuals and the hidden impact of Orientalism. Although this limited article does not aim to provide full- fledged political economy critique on the issue, it nevertheless points out the direction such critique would have to take, by way of taking up the issue of secularism as inherently related to the consolidation of World—Economy, and approaching secularism as the episteme of the tools, in the politico—ideological realm, of the capitalist system, of both legitimacy and critique.

Özet

Makale, sekülerizm konusuna, Batı Aydınlanması'nın ontolojik ve epistemelojik temeli olarak ve kapitalizm-liberalizm-demokrasi ilişkileri açısından yaklaşır. Bu yaklaşımı, Batı ve (Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'ndan devralınmış) Ortadoğu bağlamında, sekülerizmin doğasını, anlamlarını (örn. Batılı koloniye] bir kabul ettiriş veya milli egemenlik, kurumsal bir mekanizma ve dünyagörüşü olarak) ve gelişmesini etkileyen faktörlerin farklılığını ifade ederek kurar. Daha sonra sekülerizme tarihsel kapitalizmin neoliberal evresinde dikkat çekerken, Batı ve Ortadoğu aydınlarının farklı konumlarına, Oryantalizmin her iki durumda da örtük etkisine eleştirel olarak bakar. Her ne kadar bu kısa çalışma, bitmiş bir siyasal ekonomi kritiği ortaya koymayı hedeflemese de, sekülerizm konusunu, içsel olarak, Dünya--Ekonomi'nin kurulmasıyla bağlantılı ele alıp sekülerizme kapitalist sistemin siyasi--ideolojik anlamda hem meşruiyet hem eleştiri araçlarının epistemi olarak yaklaşması açısından, böyle bir kritik için gerekli olan yönü tayin etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

UNSAR, S. (2016). On the Multiple Epistemologies of Secularism. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 15, 165–190. https://ajindex.com/articles/219138

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Afary, J. and Kev n B. A. (2005). Foucault and the Iran an Revolut on. The Un vers ty of Ch cago Press.
  2. Ahmad, A. (1992). Or ental sm and After: Amb valence and Cosmopol tan Locat on n the Work of Edward Sa d, Econom c and Pol t cal Weekly, Vol. 27, No. 30, 98-116.
  3. Ahmad, F. (1969). The Young Turks: the Comm ttee of Un on and Progress n Turk sh pol t es, 1908–1914. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  4. Ahmad, F. (2008). From Emp re to Republ c: Essays on the Late Ottoman Emp re and Modern Emp re, Volume I and II. İstanbul B lg Un vers ty Press.
  5. Ahmad, F. (2003). Turkey: The Quest for Ident ty, 8th ed. Oneworld Publ cat ons. Anderson, P. (1974). L neages of the Absolut st State. London: New Left Books. Anderson, P. (1998). The Or g ns of Postmodern ty. London: Verso. Berkes, N. (1998). The Development of Secular sm n Turkey, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. Bourd eu, P. (1989). The Corporat sm of the Un versal: The Role of Intellectuals n the Modern World, Telos, 81 (Fall), 99-110.16. Bourd eu, P. and Wacquant, L.J.D. July-Aug., (1996). The Self-Infl cted Irrelevance of Amer can Academ cs, Academe, 18-25.
  6. Bourd eu, P. (1998a). A Reasoned Utop a and Econom c Fatal sm, New Left Rev ew, 227, s.125-130.
  7. Bourd eu, P. (1998b). Acts of Res stance: Aga nst the Tyranny of the Market. The New Press,
  8. New York. Bourd eu, P. and Wacquant, L.J.D. (1999).
  9. On the Cunn ng of Imper al st Reason, Theory, Culture & Soc ety, (SAGE, London, Thousand Oaks and New Delh ), Vol. 16(1), 41- 58. Bourd eu, P. (2005). The Soc al Structures of the Economy. Pol ty. Der ng l, S. (2010). The Ottomans, the Turks and World Power Pol t cs. Gorg as Press & The Is s Press.
  10. Donohue, J. and Espos to, L. J. (Eds) (2007). Islam n Trans t on:Musl m Perspect ves, 2nd ed. Oxford Un vers ty Press.
  11. Doyle, W. (1999). Or g ns of the French Revolut on, 3rd ed. Oxford Un vers ty Press.
  12. F ndley, C. V. (1980). Bureaucrat c Reform n the Ottoman Emp re. Pr nceton Un vers ty Press.
  13. F ndley, C. V. (1989). Ottoman C v l Off c aldom. Pr nceton Un vers ty Press.
  14. Fle scher, C. H. (1986). Bureaucrat and Intellectual n the Ottoman Emp re: The H stor an Mustafa Al (1541-1600).
  15. Pr nceton Un vers ty Press.
  16. Foucault, M. The Government of Self and Others: Lectures at the Collège de France 1982- 1983.
  17. Freud, S. (1929). C v l zat on and Its D scontents. Chrysoma Assoc ates Ltd. Gas orowsk, M. J. August (1987). The 1953
  18. Coup D'etat n Iran, Internat onal Journal of M ddle East Stud es, 19(3), 261-286.
  19. Gencer, B. (2012). İslam'da Modernleşme. D