知识的伊斯兰化及其基础:评价与选择

Sari Hanafi
{"title":"知识的伊斯兰化及其基础:评价与选择","authors":"Sari Hanafi","doi":"10.56529/isr.v1i2.82","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent decades, there has been much discussion on 'Islamically-grounding' the social sciences, which some researchers have described as being traditionally 'Western' in nature. This debate among Muslims flourished in the early nineties, taking place in books, articles and doctoral theses. As a sociologist, I have no qualms about using the terms 'Islamic', 'Arab', or 'Lebanese' to describe some social sciences and for some of the concepts and theories of these sciences to be inspired by the Islamic heritage and these societies. However, through a content analysis of articles, books and masters and PHD theses that adopt this orientation, as well as through interviews with some of the proponents of the Islamization of Knowledge (IoK) or Islamic grounding (ta’sil) of knowledge, I show that adding a geographical or religious adjective to the social sciences creates real problems. This paper describes and presents a synthesis of this literature, analyzes some of its problems and ponders whether the project to 'Islamize' knowledge is truly necessary or instead serves as a sort of identity politics. Based on this analysis, this paper suggests a new approach that I call 'separation, connection and pluralistic praxis' as an alternative to IoK and similar projects.","PeriodicalId":266716,"journal":{"name":"Islamic Studies Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Islamization of Knowledge and It’s Grounding: Appraisal and Alternative\",\"authors\":\"Sari Hanafi\",\"doi\":\"10.56529/isr.v1i2.82\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In recent decades, there has been much discussion on 'Islamically-grounding' the social sciences, which some researchers have described as being traditionally 'Western' in nature. This debate among Muslims flourished in the early nineties, taking place in books, articles and doctoral theses. As a sociologist, I have no qualms about using the terms 'Islamic', 'Arab', or 'Lebanese' to describe some social sciences and for some of the concepts and theories of these sciences to be inspired by the Islamic heritage and these societies. However, through a content analysis of articles, books and masters and PHD theses that adopt this orientation, as well as through interviews with some of the proponents of the Islamization of Knowledge (IoK) or Islamic grounding (ta’sil) of knowledge, I show that adding a geographical or religious adjective to the social sciences creates real problems. This paper describes and presents a synthesis of this literature, analyzes some of its problems and ponders whether the project to 'Islamize' knowledge is truly necessary or instead serves as a sort of identity politics. Based on this analysis, this paper suggests a new approach that I call 'separation, connection and pluralistic praxis' as an alternative to IoK and similar projects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":266716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Islamic Studies Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Islamic Studies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56529/isr.v1i2.82\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Islamic Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56529/isr.v1i2.82","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近几十年来,有很多关于“伊斯兰基础”社会科学的讨论,一些研究人员将其描述为传统上的“西方”性质。穆斯林之间的这种争论在90年代早期非常盛行,出现在书籍、文章和博士论文中。作为一名社会学家,我毫不犹豫地使用“伊斯兰”、“阿拉伯”或“黎巴嫩”等术语来描述一些社会科学,以及这些科学的一些概念和理论受到伊斯兰遗产和这些社会的启发。然而,通过对采用这一方向的文章、书籍、硕士和博士论文的内容分析,以及对知识伊斯兰化(IoK)或知识伊斯兰基础(ta’sil)的一些支持者的采访,我表明,在社会科学中添加地理或宗教形容词会产生真正的问题。本文描述并呈现了这些文献的综合,分析了其中的一些问题,并思考“伊斯兰化”知识的项目是否真的有必要,还是只是一种身份政治。基于这一分析,本文提出了一种新的方法,我称之为“分离、连接和多元实践”,作为IoK和类似项目的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Islamization of Knowledge and It’s Grounding: Appraisal and Alternative
In recent decades, there has been much discussion on 'Islamically-grounding' the social sciences, which some researchers have described as being traditionally 'Western' in nature. This debate among Muslims flourished in the early nineties, taking place in books, articles and doctoral theses. As a sociologist, I have no qualms about using the terms 'Islamic', 'Arab', or 'Lebanese' to describe some social sciences and for some of the concepts and theories of these sciences to be inspired by the Islamic heritage and these societies. However, through a content analysis of articles, books and masters and PHD theses that adopt this orientation, as well as through interviews with some of the proponents of the Islamization of Knowledge (IoK) or Islamic grounding (ta’sil) of knowledge, I show that adding a geographical or religious adjective to the social sciences creates real problems. This paper describes and presents a synthesis of this literature, analyzes some of its problems and ponders whether the project to 'Islamize' knowledge is truly necessary or instead serves as a sort of identity politics. Based on this analysis, this paper suggests a new approach that I call 'separation, connection and pluralistic praxis' as an alternative to IoK and similar projects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信