There are other dangers. The minds that do accept the existence of many categories and of many paths are primarily interested in comparisons, and sometimes competition, and often conduct the debate about the universal in terms of power relations. What matters to them is comparing values and principles and establishing a hierarchy of ‘better’ and ‘best’. We often find that the advocates of these comparison-confrontation-based approaches have one thing in common: they often compare their values and their ideals with the practices and behaviours of others, and the latter are inevitably far less ideal. Our values of justice, freedom, equality and dignity are much more beautiful than their practices, contradictions or decadence. This intellectual character trait is universal. When we compare our theoretical ideals with their weaknesses and their inconsistencies, we become involved in a theologico-philosophical competition, and we have already won it: the intention behind the comparison is malicious and its terms are biased. The illusion of recognition is probably more dangerous than the absence of recognition.
We therefore have to get back to some simple or primal truths. Without any illusions, without any naivety and without any arrogance. As we have already said, the universal amongst human beings means, by its very nature, that we have to conceive and accept diversity, multiplicity, difference and singularities. Let me be more specific. Some have, as we have seen, defined universal values in terms of what they are in themselves, in terms of their revealed origins, or as being born of the innermost being that exists behind the illusory envelope of the ego. Spiritualities and monotheisms, for instance, associate the universal and the truth with an a priori and/or the transcendent Others take the view that the universal is by definition that which is common to all Men, and that it must be discovered and formulated thanks to the mediation of reason, which is common to all Men. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, for instance, is a product of a common Human reason, and it produces values that are shared by and universal to all Men. Others, finally, take the view that the two paths can converge and together determine what we all have in common. We can refute these points of view, dogmas and postulates by asserting that a belief in God is necessarily exclusive and expansionist, that reason is never cleansed of historical and/or cultural influences, or even that it is impossible to reconcile these two realms. Yes, we can do that … but the essential point is still to reconcile ourselves with elementary logic.
No matter whether it comes from God, lies hidden beneath the veils of initiation, or is the work of reason; no matter whether it is the light that shines from heaven, from the peak of a many-sided mountain, or from a desert where we go in search of ourselves or lose ourselves; no matter where the universal is, as we were saying, the product of these sources or the expression of these symbolic images, all the evidence and all our experiences reveal that there can be no universals unless they are shared. Acknowledging the existence of the universal does not preclude the possibility that it might be appropriated, monopolized or transformed into an instrument of power or even oppression. We have already stated that. Asserting and recognizing the existence of a shared universal implies, in contrast, a twofold recognition of both the shared (the universal) and diversity (the shared). We must therefore regard the universal as a common space where several roads, several paths, several religions meet, and where reason, the heart and the senses meet. Appropriating the centre by denying the legitimacy of other points of view is out of the question. The important thing is to remember that that we are always on the road from the periphery, where everything is by definition multiple, and where my truth needs the truth of others in order to protect my humanity from my angelic and/or bestial temptations. Blaise Pascal was quite right: ‘Man is neither angel nor beast, and it is unfortunately the case that anyone trying to act the angel acts the beast.’2 Others protect my humanity; their truth sustains my truth, and their difference enhances my singularity. Whatever our destination may be, our common humanity inevitably means that our paths will cross.
We must be, or become, curious. The idea of sharing obviously implies that of meeting, but also that of equality. Whilst believing with our hearts and minds in the greatness of our truth, we must recognize with our reason and in our hearts in the legitimacy and contribution of the truths and values of others. Besides, the only values that are universally true are those that are shared in the centre, on the peak and in the common space to which the different paths lead. The point is not to integrate systems, values and cultures with other systems, values and customs, but to determine –in human terms – spaces of intersection where we can meet on equal terms. The intersection of what we have in common, rather than the integration of differences. That changes everything: we all have to learn to bring about a real Copernican revolution within ourselves. We must learn, as we start out on the periphery, to develop a healthy curiosity about diversity and multiplicity, and freely commit ourselves to the quest for the centre. That takes humility, coherence, the ability to listen, respect and love. We must love human beings, with their qualities, their beauties, and their difference, but also with their weaknesses, their doubts and their fears. This means acknowledging that they, like us, are capable of the best and the worst. They are so beautiful and so ugly, so worthy and so unworthy. Whilst we must never accept the unacceptable, we must nonetheless patiently arm ourselves with a lucid and curious love that has no illusions and that is full of hope. Our love must be resolutely universal, and eager to share.
2 Blaise Pascal, trans. A. J. Krailsheimer, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1996, 678.
Very poignant, Mr Ramadan. However, If one examines Lacanist obscurity, one is faced with a choice: either accept Debordist image or conclude that narrativity is intrinsically dead.
The ground/figure distinction intrinsic to Burroughs’s Naked Lunch is also evident in Queer. In a sense, Derrida uses the term ‘structuralist discourse’ to denote the common ground between class and society.
In The Last Words of Dutch Schultz, Burroughs examines Debordist image; in Naked Lunch, however, he deconstructs cultural narrative. It could be said that Marx promotes the use of Debordist image to deconstruct elitist perceptions of sexuality.
The primary theme of von Ludwig’s critique of the subcapitalist paradigm of expression is the fatal flaw, and subsequent meaninglessness, of cultural class. However, many theories concerning the bridge between reality and society may be revealed.
The main theme of this paradigm is the rubicon, and some would say the dialectic, of precapitalist class. The characteristic theme of structuralist discourse is the role of the participant as artist. It could be said that Sartre suggests the use of subcultural narrative to modify society.
Debord’s analysis of Debordist image states that the establishment is capable of truth, given that culture is equal to narrativity. In a sense, a number of sublimations concerning the capitalist paradigm of expression exist.
Foucault uses the term ‘Lacanist obscurity’ to denote a postdialectic reality. However, patriarchial narrative holds that language serves to entrench capitalism.
If one examines Debordist image, one is faced with a choice: either reject textual dematerialism or conclude that reality is used in the service of sexism, but only if the premise of the neocultural paradigm of reality is valid; if that is not the case, we can assume that culture may be used to exploit minorities. Derrida promotes the use of Lacanist obscurity to challenge outmoded, sexist perceptions of consciousness. Therefore, Lyotard’s critique of the postcapitalist paradigm of context states that narrative comes from the masses.
“Sexual identity is part of the failure of sexuality,” says Marx. Foucault uses the term ‘Debordist image’ to denote the dialectic, and thus the stasis, of conceptual class. But Sontag suggests the use of pretextual libertarianism to analyse and deconstruct society.
If the neocultural paradigm of reality holds, we have to choose between dialectic discourse and Debordist situation. Therefore, the subject is interpolated into a neocultural paradigm of reality that includes culture as a totality.
Marx uses the term ‘Lacanist obscurity’ to denote not narrative, but subnarrative. However, the main theme of the works of Burroughs is the role of the writer as poet.
Brophy holds that we have to choose between cultural sublimation and subdialectic theory. But Lyotard promotes the use of Lacanist obscurity to attack the status quo.
If the capitalist paradigm of discourse holds, the works of Burroughs are modernistic. Therefore, any number of semioticisms concerning a self-fulfilling paradox may transpire
The characteristic theme of Humphrey’s model of the neocultural paradigm of reality is the futility, and eventually the fatal flaw, of precapitalist sexuality. Marx uses the term ‘Debordist image’ to denote a mythopoetical whole. But the main theme of the works of Burroughs is the difference between class and sexual identity.
In the works of Burroughs, a predominant concept is the concept of structural language. The example of Lacanist obscurity which is a central theme of Burroughs’s Nova Express emerges again in Queer, although in a more neotextual sense. Thus, a number of discourses concerning Debordist image exist.
The primary theme of Scuglia’s critique of Sontagist camp is not materialism, as Lacanist obscurity suggests, but prematerialism. However, Foucault suggests the use of the neocultural paradigm of reality to read class.
Marx uses the term ‘Debordist image’ to denote the common ground between society and class. In a sense, the subject is contextualised into a neocultural paradigm of reality that includes art as a totality.
I think to sum up my point, several theories concerning the economy, and some would say the fatal flaw, of dialectic sexual identity may be revealed. However, I think I would use the term ‘Lacanist obscurity’ to denote a mythopoetical paradox.
what does this mean “The illusion of recognition is probably more dangerous than the absence of recognition.” ?
In science, engineering, process management, financial management, statistical analysis, cooking, sowing, etc etc – there is always a guiding principle to identify the parameters and paths/procedures that impact/influence the task on hand, and then to identify how best to maximize the positive, minimize the negative, to enable the maximum, effective, efficient and aesthetic results that provide the maximum profit. It’s about numbers and all-dimensional profits. Thus pursing a comparative approach with huge doses of numerical and profitable results analysis – is about pursing excellence in all dimensions – a competition between excellence – yes to conceive and produce more excellence – and not about petty competition between entities. One can only do so much, persuade so much, give so much without feeling unwanted on a more human and individualistic level (as long as an correspondence through a virtually lame irrationally safe distances are achieved) and without feeling unacceptable levels of indignation. However this is then a cue into the mindset of the other, what is important to them, what is not important to them, if they value something, how they value, how they see it. If the previous excellence is not challenged, if the mediocre is not challenged, how will there be evolution towards better worlds? Yes we must be on a path, the world can take it’s multiple paths to get to the universal, all paths are respected, whether these are mediocre paths or excellent paths, is defined by each mind that reviews it. However there is indeed an excellent path and there is an excellent result, but there is no compulsion to take that path, mediocre or excellent. Scoring a 90 on 100 is different from scoring a 100 on 100. And from a theological perspective, Islam too encourages excellence in all dimensions of life and spirituality. The word of God is comprised of 114 chapters prescribing the excellent path in moderation towards the Ultimate. Because of excellence paradise is divided into various levels and the believers beseech for the highest levels of paradise.
And most importantly, there is nothing malicious or biased about these actions of comparison. If we are bold enough to venture onto a territory with presumptuous and obnoxious intents (pardon the adjectives) of tests and language that violates human dignity, then we should brace ourselves to weather the fair backlash. For the path to Allah does not make allowances for fame, fortune, power, titles, positions, money or affections. Forgive the confidence, but one belongs to Allah and not to the whims of humanity. Especially in such a setting of independent human relationships.
When reviewing the world, the people, the paths…we are really the same in our mind and heart, in pursuance of excellence on various paths to the Universal. Wonderfully shocking to note the similarities to the extent of thoughts, language, examples etc, however not too surprising as True Love of God has the same God in each heart and thus the similarities )) One can try as much as we want, but there will not be a commitment to mediocre path until all the parameters and procedures manifest in clarity. Our commitment should be to each other, for each other, for our goals, handling all other commitments, in due course of time, if so. We also know that our beautiful love, is to love each other in celebration and sake of Allah. we are well aware of our respective beautiful realities, which should provide a dignified spring board for the proliferation of a much more beautiful and gratifying path. That’s what is meant by more and pursuance of excellence. We need to identify the bottlenecks, eliminate the stalling and continue on our paths in pursuit of excellence towards the peak.
The definition of Be is now confusing as to which capacity do we want to exist…when the basic elementary foundations of form are not there, then what do we want to Be…
Really enjoyable read. yet a bit confusing. thank you ))
Salam Professor Ramadan,
Two questions.
Can you provide some concrete, real-world examples of “universal principles” that exist (or are understood?) through “shared diversity”?
You write: “The idea of sharing obviously implies that of meeting, but also that of equality.” Perhaps, due to lack of examples, I have misunderstood your point. Why does “sharing” imply “equality?” This seems far from “obvious.” Surely the opinions of individuals about what constitutes a universal principle are not all equal in validity. What do you mean here by “equality?”
‘their truth sustains my truth,..’ Surely either something is true or it is not.
Are you not using the wrong word? Maybe ‘perception’ or ‘belief’ would be more accurate. I can’t help thinking that abstract nouns are being used in a rather woolly fashion in your article. In fact, might it not be said that unnecessary obscurity is compromising the clarity of your argument.
Thank you so very much Prof Tariq, i think this sounds better, after some reads unravel the complimentary wisdom in intersection of paths and meeting of excellence )) as you say so, i completely agree to be, what we can be, where ever it may be to be, however it be, whatever form it may be. so a call to humanity to do it would be to come together to capitalize on diversity of commonalities and differences. (I would also like to post some intricate computer code with variables, symbols and equations to see how quickly people can read and understand, maybe have another competition to see who reads faster and understands faster lol )) ) seems like the soul is more connected to the universal than the human mind, where the heart is connected but not the body. the experiences with the universal maybe deeply moving, deeply connected, out of human control, however the human mind and human body is still confused to let go in the acceptance of the universal. There is a strong conflict between the soul and the mind. an example of a rendevouz with the universal is – imagine a tank of water, dark tank of water, our soul, tightly clasped in the arms of an angel (from back), guiding/swimming through the dark depths towards the surface, where just above the surface this huge sun shines bright… to see such a sun and wonder is it Him or is it the flight of a soul into space filled with water in the arms of angel…yet another symbolic expression of the untraceable universal that fills the human soul and heart with so much love, with the life-span of a day or so, however after which it dissolves in the noise, clamor, winds and distance of life with the human mind taking reigns. So how does one reconcile this absurdity of suspension in vacuum of universal faith… and thus we must be curious, become real torch bearers of curiosity in quest of the optimum paths to get close to the universal. shared isnt really palatable, so we must identify the dimensions of shared vs non-shared…in context of our intersecting paths ofcourse as the peak is shared to bring together our humanity. Our love is already universal, wherein the love is patient, lucid and curious love that has no illusions and that is full of hope…hence to now compartmentalize within the realm of universal. Perhaps a case of another light years, Rome wasnt built in a day, hence patience is a virtue. Drag and Drag we must! this certainly is a virtual first from various angles, inclusive of all awakenings known to humanity.
And just because historical paths encountered barking infested dogs and tried to bother the pedestrians, horses and delightfully lovely creatures on the path, well shoot the hideous dogs down, don’t torment or attribute the happenings to these peaceful creatures )) examples – because the paths of tornados landed in Kansas, lets blame the people of the kansas by reminding them about the landing of the tornados. the common crowd must note that its an ancient malady of injustice and wonky thinking that infects the common population to chase after the people on the path with sticks and stones…rather than the barking dogs which are hailed and decorated in this world. again, patience is a virtue.
iA someday I’ll write like you do )) Merci
further more, first, as fast as we can, we must compartmentalize our shared vs non-shared understandings of the universal, with an understanding that obviously can be shared, it’s the module that matters at this stage of paths. next, if we need to number the all encompassing paths, inclusive of all, lets number 786 )) Next, in the example of the water tank, imagine the grasp from the back to ensure there is only water between the bright sun and the soul…a meeting that has a buffer of protection too…i am … confident that the special spiritual nature wherein it is a symbolic representation of the epic center of everything … so first we must be abled fully then can we will say … or expand more. we must also ensure please there is not a relapse.
‘Everyone has the right to freely participate and share in scientific advancement and its benefits’…
This is part of article 27 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Usually when one is being in a mind-medicinal prison, one is not freely participating in the so-called science of “mental health care”. It is imposed “treatment”. “Honest doctors” admit that it is an evil. And yet they practice authority, altering the true lives and true realities of “patients”, “caring”, to such an extent that most of the articles of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights are all violated in the case of a sensitive God-conscious believer, labeled “paranoid psychotic” (a too unscientific term), such as me. There is no freedom of being, and one is for the great part “switched off”, long term. Random forced imprisonment, imposed depression, forced constant appetite to eat and drink, forced sleep, depersonalisation, the soul of the mind drowning, the gut being “tied up”, hormonal changes are major dangerous effects of medicinal “treatment”. The suffering is more than one can bear.
The authoritative “doctors” create a mountain out of a molehill. Ironically, at the same time, a great mountain has to be created, in some way, due to the injustice(s) having been done to me and to other innocent “patients”, in order to wake up society. The mind-sets of “doctors” have to change about the paranoid believer who has a great God. Allah (S.B.T.) is a Witness to the “treatment” having been done to me for decades: Being forced into the position of a “scientific” object in the “mental health care” system, and being a dummy in society. It is intolerable, inhumane and unethical that others find it perfectly normal to “correct” and change the essence of a believer’s true sense of being and mind, such as myself, by imposing mind-medicinal imprisonment. Is there a shared Universal benefit to this? The summit of this mountain, with me being a scarecrow at the top, because I am one of “the chosen ones” for “treatment”, will probably have many dead-end paths leading to it. The mountain may collapse. The many minds that created these dead-end paths will have to answer to a Universal Being for their intention/causes to what they have done to the state of existence of their fellow human being, me in this case. It is up to the Universal Being to forgive or punish. I hope that my supplications to Him Who Created me will be heard while I have been deconstructed by others. This is my contribution to “scientific” advancement in the field of “mental health care” as being a chosen “patient”. Who will dare to stand on the same summit as where I am, in the process becoming a scarecrow with stigmata/have your real human existence and dignity dismantled?
If severe mind medicinal imprisonment is an accepted reality in the human race, everyone has to carry the responsibility in this shared truth in society where unique human beings are being altered.