The Reception of Modern "Western Philosophy" and Methods of Philosophical Comparison in Iran

The state of the academic and public engagement in philosophical discourse in contemporary Iran is often marked by a curious divide between “Islamic” and “western” philosophy. This dualistic setting has its historical roots in the reception of modern European philosophy in the 19th century which constitutes a major shift in modern Iranian intellectual history. Eminent Iranian intellectuals who, in varying depth and scope, tried to introduce doctrines of tried to introduce the views of various European thinkers to Iranian intellectual discourse, often did so in order to present an alternative to the philosophical tradition of “Islamic philosophy.” Consequently, while “Islamic philosophy” remained dominant within the scholastic tradition, “western philosophy” was favoured within the newly established European-style institutions of higher education. Today both branches are taught as separate academic subjects at Iranian universities. Adherence to such binary mode of philosophical practice has led to comparisons between these two strands of philosophical thinking and as such has been a topic of debate and inquiry among Iranian, and occasionally non-Iranian, scholars. Furthermore, comparative philosophical studies have gained new momentum in today’s Iran as can be noted in many publications that directly deal with comparison of western and Muslim philosophers and their respective doctrines. This panel will examine the above issues from both an analytical perspective by discussing various examples of philosophical comparisons and their significance for contemporary philosophical discourse in Iran and a methodological perspective by addressing the merits of the very idea of comparative philosophy. The first paper (by Ali Gheissari) focuses on “The Reception of Continental Philosophy” and asks for the various debates this reception process has initiated from a comparative perspective. The second paper, “Uneven Reception of Analytic Philosophy in Iran” (by Hussein Banai), deals with yet another western philosophical tradition and asks how it has been appropriated in the works of several prominent Iranian philosophers. The third contributor, Ali Paya, concentrates on the impact of a particular strand of “western” philosophical thought, namely “critical Rationalism,” and discusses the “Introduction of Critical Rationalism to the Iranian Public” from the presenter’s personal perspective who is himself involved in this debate. The fourth presentation (by Roman Seidel), “Notes on Apologetic Comparisons and Alternative Designs,” puts specific emphasis on the methodological question of comparative philosophy and explores its and its significance in the context of philosophical debates in contemporary Iran.


Presentations

by /

This paper is part of a broader project to study the evolution of modern philosophical Persian from the late 19th century to the present. More specifically it will discuss the introduction and reception of modern continental philosophy in Iran during this time period. From a comparative perspective the paper will also examine a number of linguistic and historical debates that have often recurred in the Middle East regarding the impact of western ideas—such as the question of translation and its varied impact on intellectual history. In this paper particular attention will be given to the early introduction of rationalism (notably Descartes) and critical philosophy (Kant and later Hegel), followed by Marxism (mostly through a Russia route), and in later periods existentialism, phenomenology, and hermeneutics. Further attention will be given to the intellectual background and textual style of individual translators and commentators, from early figures such as Mollâ Lâlezâr Hamadâni, Badi’ al-Molk Mirzâ, Vosuq al-Dowleh, and Mohammad-Ali Forughi to later authors such as Yahyâ Mahdavi, Hamid Enâyat, Ezzatollâh Fulâdvand, Mir-Shamseddin Adib-Soltâni, Abdolkarim Rashidiân, Manuchehr Sâne’i-Darrebidi, and Siâvash Jomâdi, among others, who translated or commented on works by Kant, Hegel, Dilthey, Husserl, Heidegger, and others. The paper will also discuss available literature in print and the readership of modern continental philosophy in Iran, including both the general educated audience as well as the academic and seminary circles and will discuss contributing variables in the relative popularity of continental, rather than analytic, philosophy in Iran. On the whole this paper will present a discussion about sources, the style and diction of individual translators and commentators together with their diverse approach to the linguistic capital of philosophical Persian, usage of Arabic, attempts to ‘purify’ Persian, and the question of ideology in the reception of modern continental philosophy in Iran.

by /

Remarkably little scholarship in Iranian Studies has been devoted to the reception of analytic philosophy among Iranian philosophers or historians of ideas. Given that analytic philosophy is widely regarded as one of the most important and influential traditions of philosophical inquiry over the past century – with significant contributions to topics in ethics, legal and political philosophy, aesthetics, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language – this is a rather glaring oversight. To be sure, developments in Western philosophy have always found critical and engaging interlocutors inside Iran (comparative philosophy is among the most dynamic and storied intellectual traditions in Iran). What is especially curious about analytic philosophy’s reception in Iran, however, is the tepid (when compared to continental philosophy) and uneven (as regards disciplinary designations) manner in which Iranian scholars have attempted to engage with (e.g. translate, debate, teach) central claims in works by such figures as Bertrand Russell, Alfred North Whitehead, G.E. Moore, W.V. Quine, Ludwig Wittgenstein, or more contemporary thinkers like Peter Strawson, John Austin, Ronald Dworkin, and John Rawls. This paper aims to account for this peculiar phenomenon by examining two intersecting, yet distinct, contexts affecting the reception of Western analytic philosophy in Iran. The first context concerns the intellectual relevance and utility of analytic philosophy to Iranian society and, by extension, philosophers. It is clear from the works of many Iranian philosophers that the analytic tradition has lacked the emancipatory zeal and promise of its continental counterparts for a society struggling against the dual legacies of imperialism and arbitrary rule. The second context has to do with the almost unapologetically insular nature of analytic philosophy itself. The latter has indeed been a uniquely Anglo-American enterprise, with a rather narrow and self-referential focus on approximations of “ideal-types” that often assume an imperfect-but-evolving democratic and (post)industrial background conditions. This paper examines the salience of these arguments with reference to the works of several prominent Iranian philosophers (Mehdi Haeri Yazdi, Ramin Jahanbegloo, Abdolkarim Soroush, Hamid Vahid Dastgerdi, Mahmoud Khatami, among others) and in relation to major intellectual debates inside Iran in ethics, legal and political philosophy, and philosophy of language.

by /

Iran, uniquely among all Muslim countries, has a rich philosophical heritage. The majority of great Muslim philosophers have been Iranian. When philosophy died away in the Western flank of Islamdom at the end of 12th century, it continued to flourish uninterrupted in Iran (Persia). Later generations of Iranian philosophers introduced new philosophical schools over and above what had been developed by the earlier Muslim philosophers. Schools of Isfahan, Shiraz and Tehran, among others, each further enriched the intellectual heritage known as ‘Islamic philosophy’.
‘Modern Western philosophy’ was introduced to the Iranian educated public since the nineteenth century. However, serious engagement with the ideas of various Western philosophers only began from the mid-twentieth century onward.
In this paper, following a brief sketch of the development of philosophical thought in Iran and the introduction of the views of Western philosophers to Iran’s cultural milieu, I shall focus on a particular strand of Western philosophical thought, Critical Rationalism (CR), due to Karl Popper (1902-1994) and his students and discuss two inter-related topics. On the one hand, I shall explain the modalities of dissemination of CR in Iran and assess the reception of CR by the Iranian educated classes. On the other, I shall argue that among Iranian scholars those who have had a fair familiarity with the heritage of ‘Islamic philosophy’ as well as some Western schools of philosophy, whether in the Continental or Analytic traditions, and have consciously used philosophy for doctrinal purposes and not merely academic practices, have tended to subscribe to aspects of modern philosophy which are all contrary to the teachings of CR. The aspects in question are justificationism, linguistic turn and total reliance on discussions about meaning, and subjectivism. I shall highlight my arguments by drawing on the views of a number of contemporary Iranian philosophers including Reza Davari, Mostafa Malekian, Mohammad Shabestary, and Abdolkarim Soroush.

by /

The first part of this paper examines a specific type of comparative philosophy in Iran, namely the tendency of apologetic comparison which appears to be highly influential in certain intellectual and academic circles associated with the ideological discourse of the Islamic Republic. One distinctive feature of this approach is that the epistemological and moral foundations of various strands of European philosophy become the target of fundamental criticism and are measured against a particular interpretation of the philosophy of Molla Sadra. This apologetic comparative approach to European Philosophy can be clearly noted in such widely circulated works as Osūl-e falsafe va ravesh-e reʾālism (based on Ṭabāṭabāī’s lectures together with commentaries by Moṭahharī). In this paper I shall discuss the ideological context of such approach, which has further been employed and developed by students of Moṭahharī, and analyse its general comparative design by questioning its specific preconditions—in terms of the purpose of the comparison, choice of the objects of comparison by the one who compares, and the grounds on which comparison takes place. In the second part, by drawing on the above preconditions, I shall discuss additional comparative designs as methodological alternatives and will give some examples as to where these other approaches have been applied in contemporary philosophical discourse in Iran and in what way they could be employed systematically in order to substantively link the intellectual archives of the Islamicate philosophical tradition to various contemporary strands of modern philosophy.