Formulation of the Claim

Orthodoxy, in Arkoun’s sense, is the imposition of a single interpretation by force and coercion.

Explanation

Arkoun does not use the term orthodoxy as a neutral description of a religious doctrine, but rather as a name for a power that imposes a single meaning and closes off the field to plural understandings. For this reason, the term in his work is linked more to a practice of compulsion than to any specific doctrinal content.

This usage must be understood within his critique of the structures that control meaning within religious thought. Orthodoxy, in this sense, refers to a mechanism that prevents disagreement and turns interpretation into a binding rule that does not permit revision or plurality.

Its Place in the Book’s Argument

This atom appears within a broader context in which Arkoun works to criticize forms of closure in Islamic thought, especially when reading becomes a power that imposes itself as the only truth. It aligns with his general thesis in deconstructing what he calls systems of exclusion that besiege ijtihad and limit the possibility of historical thinking about texts.

Limits of the Claim

This atom should not be taken to imply an all-encompassing evaluative judgment on the entire religious heritage or on every doctrinal difference; it describes a pattern of imposition and coercion in interpretation, not a judgment on religion as a whole or on all forms of tradition.

Brief Evidence

It expands the concept of “orthodoxy” to mean the imposition of a single interpretation by force and coercion. Arkoun does not use the term as a neutral description of a religious doctrine, but as a name for a power that closes off the field to plural understandings. For this reason, the term in his work is linked more to a practice of compulsion than to any specific doctrinal content.