Formulation of the claim
The relationship with the West and modernity is understood through a critique of mythologization and domination, and through distinguishing between what can be used and what needs local adaptation.
Why do these elements come together?
These elements come together because, taken together, they outline Arkoun’s way of looking at the West and modernity without simplification or surrender to a ready-made image. Thus The tension between Islam and the West is produced by the imaginary and institutions shows that tension does not rest on a fixed essence, but is fed by mental images, institutional structures, and broader transformations. And The West is historical, not mythical, and modernity can be locally developed places the West within history and makes modernity an experience that can be understood, critiqued, and developed—not a closed mold or a revealed standard.
This picture is broadened further by other elements that confirm that critique does not mean total rejection. For Critiquing Western modernity does not negate our need for freedom, the rejection of mythologization is linked to retaining the gains of freedom and rights, while Modernity is not pure liberation but may be used for domination explains that modernity can become an instrument of cultural control if it is treated as absolute superiority. Islam in Europe is a social and legal issue, not only a religious one adds a dimension that reminds us the relationship with the West cannot be reduced to doctrine alone, and The European spiritual void gives rise to religious return notes that the West itself carries internal tensions that affect its image and its relations with others.
Place of the collection in the book
This collection is linked to the book Where Is Contemporary Islamic Thought?, where Arkoun addresses the relationship between Islam and the West and modernity as one that cannot be sustained by ready-made images or absolute positions, but only by historical and critical reading. It also belongs to the book’s argument, which holds that the crisis cannot be understood from the outside alone, nor resolved by retreating into a defensive discourse; rather, what is needed is to open space for critiquing mythologization, distinguishing genuine gains, and building a local path for freedom, secularization, and rights.
Elements of the collection
- The tension between Islam and the West is produced by the imaginary and institutions
- The West is historical, not mythical, and modernity can be locally developed
- Critiquing Western modernity does not negate our need for freedom
- Modernity is not pure liberation but may be used for domination
- Islam in Europe is a social and legal issue, not only a religious one
- The European spiritual void gives rise to religious return
Brief evidence
This collection gathers passages that view the relationship with the West and modernity as a complex historical relationship that cannot be understood through absolute rejection or dependency. What is required is to dismantle the mythical images that turn the West into a single block, and to uncover the forms of domination that accompany the transfer of modernity. At the same time, theoretical importation is not enough; what is used must be localized within a path that fits the context. In this way, modernity here is defined as a critical experience open to adaptation, not as a ready-made model or an imagined adversary.
Conclusion
This page brings together elements that converge on a single view: the West and modernity are understood historically and critically, not through mythologization or absolute rejection, thereby opening the possibility of building a local modernity that is not subject to domination.