Immanuel Kant's notion of "True Liberty" in a Secular State (3)


The public sphere, probably the most important product of the Enlightenment, was supposed to be separated from religion and religious values. It is essential, however, to discern the origin of, and the historical events leading to, creation of this central concept of secular discourse. In the eighteenth century England, as Peter van der Veer shows, creation of the public sphere galvanized voluntary groups of Evangelical Christians, who believed deeply in the concept of Natural Religion, which as Talal Asad argues, is rooted in the Christian values.
Asad’s analysis shows that in the seventeenth century a systematic attempt was made to produce a universal definition of religion. He states that, "the fragmentation of the unity and authority of the Roman church and the consequent wars of religion, which tore European principalities apart" constituted the social context within which such an attempt was made possible. This attempt resulted in creation of Natural Religion. This response which was particularly developed to address problems of Christian theology resulted in emergence of the universal phenomenon called Natural Religion. Asad emphasizes that this, "was a crucial step in formation of the modern concept of religious belief, experience, and practice."
In this process, Christianity becomes redefined in terms of Natural Religion and its values in terms of universal values. Therefore, although in a different framework, religion becomes a central part of the public sphere. Thus, as van der Veer states, " Enlightenment did not do away with religion in Europe…there continued to be a direct connection between natural science and natural religion, as well as between political debate and religion." This so-called liberal public sphere, therefore, not only did not provide a value free sphere encompassing all the citizens, but also historically excluded certain groups of people.

(posted by Farid)
Posted:Friday, July 25, 2003 | 

Nikahang Kowsar in Montreal



Nikahang Kowsar, an Iranian cartoonist, will have an exhibition of his works on Sunday July 27 at Concordia University. He is in Canada by invitation of the Association of Canadian Editorial Cartoonists (ACEC) for their annual meeting. His speech is about "Iranian Editorial Cartoonists vs. Political Power; In Iran and Abroad" I do not know why the majoirty of his works are about George W Bush.

( posted by Iman)

Posted:Friday, July 25, 2003 | 

Immanuel Kant's notion of "True Liberty" in a Secular State (2)

A gradual transformation, Kant argues, would be achieved through "the will of the world ruler." He states that, "this ruler invisibly binds all together, under a common government, in a state inadequately represented and prepared for in the past through the visible church." Under this condition of "true freedom," he believes that, equality springs up and the degrading distinction between laity and clergy ceases.
To recapitulate, Kant believes that the embedded power of "reason" in individuals within a condition of "true freedom" would make salvation accessible to all. Also, that there should not be any visible church vested with the power over individuals since it violates the requirement of salvation as an inner journey. Accordingly, the state must become merely that invisible power which binds all together to provide the necessary sphere within which individuals would have a chance to flourish: the condition of true freedom.
Kant's assumptions, concerning the existence of a "pure religion" and "moral law," also the ability of individuals to access and discover them through the power of "reason," qualifies him to define an abstract sphere detached from the society within an imaginary vacuum and utopian condition of "true liberty." It is not my goal, however, to challenge these assumptions, but rather to engage the concept of "true liberty" and demonstrate the merits of this secularism's promise.
This condition of true liberty, that is to be established through an invisible force of government, accordingly has to have two main characteristics. First, it needs to be devoid of any predetermined values, including religious ones. Second, no external forces within this sphere should interfere with the inner journey of individuals. Here, I will challenge these two promises of secularism. First, I will historicize the processes through which the concept of public sphere, a sphere in which individual has to be able to experience the condition of "true liberty," has been produced. Second, I will demonstrate the mechanism with which the external power of the secular state interferes with the inner journey of individuals.

(written by Navid)
(posted by Farid)
Posted:Thursday, July 24, 2003 | 

Iranian students in McGill


Last week I came across McGill Iranian students’ website. They had an outdoor picnic. I thought it might be a good opportunity to know more people in Montreal. The location was Parc Jean Drapeau formerly known as the Parc-des-Iles, a beautiful park in an island in the south shore of Montreal. The most wonderful part of park is Biosphere .

Anyway, I took metro to get there. I found them easily; by Iranian pop music! I thought many people would come. Though the meeting was scheduled at 11, most of them (about 15) showed up in the afternoon! I found them nice and friendly people. We talked about different issues like the Iranian community in Montreal, their interest, political affiliation and also McGill Iranian students and their activities. They said that there are about 100 Iranian students in McGill. Most of them study in undergraduate faculties. It seems that this association is not active. As far as I know McGill is a conservative university and people usually enjoy their life!! (I do not know why universities that I have studied till now, all have been conservative. I think I am not a conservative person!). We talked about medical education since some of them want to enter to medical school in future. Apart from this fact that Medicine in Canada is competitive, they believed that after September 11 the situation has become worse!. They thought it is easier for a Jewish applicant to get position in medical school.
The organizers provided a nice fast food and we played a friendly football game ( I was goalkeeper!)
I hope that I have time to participate in their activities. I suggested them to develop their website. In compare to other Iranians student association in Canada like Concordia University , University of Alberta, University of Toronto it is very simple without any update information. Of course, you can find some links to Iranian/Persian delicious recipes!!

(posted by Iman)
Posted:Wednesday, July 23, 2003 | 

This is written by Navid ; my brother.

Immanuel Kant's notion of "True Liberty" in a Secular State(1)

Abstract

Immanuel Kant, in his Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, argues for separation of religion and state, an ideology known as secularism. He claims that the human being needs a condition of "true liberty" in which the universal faculty of "reason" would be rendered capable of discovering "moral law" and "pure religion." This claim enabled him to argue for secularism. He asserts that only in a condition of "true liberty" individuals can access their inner true potential; consequently, he claims that no outer force is capable of providing such a possibility. Therefore, he believes that excluding religion, as an established controlling power, from the political sphere is imperative in order to achieve the state of "true liberty." This argument constitutes the underpinning of the secular thesis, the foundation of the contemporary political discourse.
In this paper, I will argue that secularization thesis not only suffers ideologically, but itself becomes an oppressive framework and therefore unable to deliver its promise of "true liberty." Also, I will demonstrate that this foundation has some serious consequences in our contemporary political discourse.

First, however, I would like to elaborate on Kant's argument and his rationale.

Kant believes that it is the individual's responsibility to work his way towards "pure religion." He accordingly argues that in order to accomplish such a task a type of inner feelings of duty within the individual needs to be created. He believes that this inner quality is the only route to salvation. Consequently, any other force, which would impose certain qualities on the human being, has no merit since it would not change the inner. He states, "[T]here is absolutely no salvation for human beings except in the innermost adoption of genuine moral principles in their disposition." He refers to any other attempts to achieve this state as a "perversity," and goes on to say that, "to interfere with this adoption is surely not the so often blamed sensibility but a certain self-incurred perversity." He believes that this "innermost adoption of genuine moral principles" is a gradual reform.

(posted by Farid)
Posted:Wednesday, July 23, 2003 | 

This is a wonderful cartoon. It has been published in the Gozresh, an Iranian periodical magazine. Alas! its editor is in jail now! and its reason is obvious!!

(posted by Iman)


Posted:Wednesday, July 23, 2003 | 

Pluralism(14)

A:You also confirmed my guess in not believing in Muhammad as a prophet, so you see my surprise that how can it be possible that somebody believes in prophethood of someone, but still think that he is not his teacher.
This is that version of pluralism that I don’t understand, and in fact this is the gist of what I was going to write now, but since this email already is too big, I’ll send it separately soon.

B: IF I were born into the Muslim religion it is almost certain that I would accept Mohamed as my prophet. But that was not my experience. Nor when I read about it is there any inclination on my part to study Islam. I don't find fault with it. I just say it is not my path this lifetime. There are many Christian teachers. I ignore some of them because their path does not fit mine. But I acknowledge that they have helped other people. I don't go to AA because it is not my path. I don't have a problem with alcohol. I applaud those who do go and practice the concepts. I would say that pluralism implies that there are many ways to reach God. I know there are Buddhist, Baptist, Hindu and Muslim saints. Each has followed the course that they felt drawn to. I don't have a problem with someone following a different course than mine though that does make me a sort of odd ball in Christianity. I do have a problem with a Buddhist, Baptist, Hindu, Muslim etc who uses his religion to attack others and does harm to others. I do not believe that he/she is really relating to God but merely following the teaching of some fanatic teacher.

(posted by Farid)
Posted:Tuesday, July 22, 2003 | 

Freedom and red lines!

Sometimes we try to find some scientific documents to show moral or rational base for a social issue. I think it is not always reliable. It is really challenging and in many cases, it is confusing especially in the western world that freedom is an important issue. Homosexuality is one of those issues that people have tried to solve it by considering human rights. However, all debates are not like this. A recent heated argument in Canada is the decriminalization of Marijuana.


They say that it is necessary for some patients and it should be available. They have some reasons to prove their claim. However, the medicinal use of Marijuana is controversial. Regarding the therapeutic effect of Marijuana, in Harrison textbook of Medicine it is written

Marijuana administered as cigarettes or as a synthetic oral cannabinoid (dronabinol), has been proposed to have a number of properties that may be clinically useful in some situations. These include antiemetic effects in chemotherapy recipients, appetite-promoting effects in AIDS, reduction of intraocular pressure in glaucoma, and reduction of spasticity in multiple sclerosis and other neurologic disorders. With the possible exception of AIDS-related cachexia, none of these attributes of marijuana compounds is clearly superior to other readily available therapies. Furthermore, any therapeutic benefit of marijuana must be balanced against the many unhealthy psychoactive effects associated with its use.

There are many other similar examples like swinging, sex in teenagersHow can we define the red lines in a society? Is it possible that we have a free society without any restriction? I do not know what we would say if some people try to decriminalize opium!

(posted by Iman)




Posted:Monday, July 21, 2003 | 

Ma liberté de penser


by Florent Pagny via Nabavionline


Mes chers amis appréciez-le!!


Quitte à tout prendre prenez mes gosses et la télé,
Ma brosse à dent mon revolver la voiture ça c'est déjà fait,
Avec les interdits bancaires prenez ma femme, le canapé,
Le micro onde, le frigidaire,
Et même jusqu'à ma vie privée
De toute façon à découvert,
Je peux bien vendre mon âme au Diable,
Avec lui on peut s'arranger,
Puisque ici tout est négociable, mais vous n'aurez pas,
Ma liberté de penser.


Prenez mon lit, les disques d'or, ma bonne humeur,
Les petites cuillères, tout ce qu'à vos yeux a de la valeur,
Et dont je n'ai plus rien à faire, quitte à tout prendre n'oubliez pas,
Le shit planqué sous l'étagère,
Tout ce qui est beau et compte pour moi,
J' préfère que ça parte à l'Abbé Pierre,
J' peux donner mon corps à la science,
S' il y'a quelque chose à prélever,
Et que ça vous donne bonne conscience, mais vous n'aurez pas,
Ma liberté de penser.

Ma liberté de penser.


J' peux vider mes poches sur la table,
Ca fait longtemps qu'elles sont trouées,
Baisser mon froc j'en suis capable, mais vous n'aurez pas,
Ma liberté de penser.


Quitte à tout prendre et tout solder,
Pour que vos petites affaires s'arrangent,
J' prends juste mon pyjama rayé,
Et je vous fais cadeaux des oranges,
Vous pouvez même bien tout garder,
J'emporterai rien en enfer,
Quitte à tout prendre j' préfère y' aller,
Si le paradis vous est offert,
Je peux bien vendre mon âme au diable,
Avec lui on peut s'arranger,
Puisque ici tout est négociable, mais vous n'aurez pas,
Non vous n'aurez pas,
Ma liberté de penser.
Ma liberté de penser.


(posted by Iman)


Posted:Sunday, July 20, 2003 | 

Pluralism(13)

A:(cont. from last part)… now when Job asked about the reason of this, God answered that you are not always aware of the reason behind things; so what we have here is that we have the fact but we don't understand the reason behind it, but implicit in God's answer is that what God does is the best for his people, though they don't understand the reason immediately, now in our situation, we can ask God , "why didn't you send all prophets at the same time, since it would be better”, and his answer that "you don't understand the reason fully " again has implicit in it that this is the best for people; and this is what I was trying to say, that even people may have different tendencies towards different ways, it isn't the best thing that they obey the one they choose, but its the best that they choose the one that is sent for their time, since this is what God is doing.This is the way God is sending his prophets, so even we like it or not, this is the best for us.

B: I AGREE with that.

(posted by Farid)


Posted:Sunday, July 20, 2003 |