The idea
This claim assumes that the dominance of scientific reason has often come at the expense of other dimensions of human experience. When understanding is reduced to what can be measured and abstracted, attention to the symbols, stories, and images that give life its cultural meaning weakens. The critique is therefore not directed at science itself, but at narrowness of vision when it becomes the sole standard of understanding.
Concise formulation
Scientific reason: dominated reductionistically and neglected the symbolic and the narrative
Its place in the book’s argument
This claim plays a clear role in the book’s argument because it shows that any project that reads the human being justly must not confine him or her to the instrumental or abstract dimension. The reference to the symbolic and the narrative reveals that meaning is not produced by abstract facts alone. From here, the claim aligns with the book’s attempt to restore value to what reductionist reading has marginalized.
Why it matters
Its importance appears in that it explains one aspect of Arkoun’s critique of modern knowledge when it becomes narrow and closed within a single model. His understanding of the human being needs a space that includes meaning, narrative, and symbol, not merely material facts. This illuminates why he is concerned with revising the tools of understanding rather than merely settling for their content.
Reading questions
- When does the power of science turn into a reduction that constricts meaning?
- Why are the symbolic and the narrative necessary for understanding the human being?