The idea
This claim shows that modernization in Islamic societies did not reach the level of deep transformation that changes ways of thinking and knowledge production. The point is not to deny the emergence of new institutions or systems, but to say that these transformations remained closer to administration and organization than to a comprehensive cultural and scientific shift. Modernization here thus appears partial and unfinished, because it did not affect the epistemic structure as it should have.
Concise formulation
Modernization in Islamic societies remained bureaucratic without a corresponding intellectual and scientific modernization
Its place in the book’s argument
This claim occupies a central place in the book’s argument because it distinguishes between what appears in the public sphere as change and what is required for a genuine modernity to emerge. In this formulation, visible modernization becomes an object of critique rather than sufficient evidence of transformation. The book uses this distinction to explain why formal reforms are not enough to understand the crisis of Islamic societies.
Why it matters
The importance of the claim becomes clear because it prevents the reader from confusing modern forms with genuine intellectual transformation. It also helps explain Arkoun’s critique of any reading that limits itself to institutions and symbols without asking about knowledge and consciousness. It further raises the question of why the impact of modernity remains limited when it is not accompanied by a change in ways of thinking.
Brief evidence passage
This claim shows that modernization in Islamic societies did not reach the level of deep transformation that changes ways of thinking and knowledge production. The point is not to deny the emergence of new institutions or systems, but to say that these transformations remained closer to administration and organization than to a comprehensive cultural and scientific shift. Modernization thus appears partial and incomplete.
Reading questions
- What makes it incomplete modernization in the text’s view: the absence of institutions, or the absence of epistemic transformation?
- How does this claim change the way we understand the relationship between Islamic societies and modernity?
Degree of documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book’s material.