Idea
This idea holds that many social studies, whether Western or Arab, tend to follow the discourse of power or of elites more than they follow living society as it is in its diversity and contradictions. As a result, ordinary people do not appear, nor do the differences within the Islamic field itself become clear. Knowledge here becomes closer to an official image than to a description of real society.
Concise Formulation
Western and Arab social sciences: are often preoccupied with the discourse of power or the discourse of
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This idea serves the book’s argument when it shows that knowledge of Islam cannot remain captive to what authorities say or what institutions repeat. It shifts attention from top to bottom, and from declared discourse to the multiple social realities. In this way, Arkoun links criticism of the sources of knowledge with criticism of the viewpoint itself, because both affect what is seen and what is neglected.
Why It Matters
This idea is important because it reveals that the problem is not a scarcity of talk about Islam, but the kind of voice that is heard about it. It explains why some readings seem flat or one-dimensional. It also helps us understand Arkoun’s interest in plurality within Islamic societies, not as a side detail but as a condition for any serious understanding.
Brief Evidence
The text criticizes Western and Arab social sciences because they are often preoccupied with the discourse of power and elites more than with living society in its diversity and contradictions. As a result, ordinary people do not appear, nor do the differences within the Islamic field itself become clear. Knowledge thus becomes closer to an official image than to a living social description.
Reading Questions
- Why is focusing on the discourse of power an obstacle to understanding living society?
- What does the researcher miss when they ignore diversity within Islamic societies?
Documentation Level
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book’s material.