تحول در عادت‌واره‌های میدان روشنفکری عرفی در مواجهه با مدرنیته و غرب
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش سیاست نظری
1 - استادیار گروه اندیشه سیاسی، پژوهشکده امام خمینی و انقلاب اسلامی، ایران
کلید واژه: روشنفکران, روشنفکران عرفی, بازار کلامی , بوردیو, تحول عادت‌واره‌های میدان روشنفکری.,
چکیده مقاله :
بیشتر مطالعات و منابع جدی دربارۀ نحوۀ واکنش روشنفکران عرفی در مواجهه با مدرنیته و غرب معمولاً یا چندان توجهی به تغییر و تحول دیدگاههای آنها در طول تاریخ معاصر ندارند، یا چنین فرض میکنند که عادتوارهها و تولیدات کلامی آنها، چندان تغییری نداشته است. اما با بررسی دقیقتر متوجه میشویم که در برهههای متفاوت تاریخ معاصر، این کالاهای کلامی تحولیافته، در برخی مواقع به روشنفکران دینی نزدیک شدهاند و در برخی مواقع فاصله گرفتهاند. مطالعۀ این فراز و فرودها می‌تواند پرتوی تازهای بر تحولات تاریخی و نقش روشنفکران در بسیج سیاسی مردم بیفکند. از اینرو پرسش اصلی این پژوهش این است که چه تحولی در کالاهای کلامی تولیدشده در میدان روشنفکری عرفی در مواجهه با غرب از مشروطه تا پس از انقلاب اسلامی رخ داده است؟ یافتۀ پژوهش نشان میدهد که روشنفکران عرفی در عصر مشروطه اکثراً با دید حیرت و سپس تحسین به غرب و مدرنیته مینگریستند و راهحل مشکل عقب‌ماندگی ایران را تقلید و در نهایت گرتهبرداری از غرب میدانستند. اما به دلایل تجربی، تاریخی و ذهنی، در طول کمتر از یک قرن، این دیدگاه مثبت به غرب و مدرنیته در دهه‌های 40 و 50 تغییر یافت؛ به نحوی که میتوان گفت که بخش بزرگی از روشنفکران عرفی در این دوره، با نزدیک شدن به روشنفکران دینی، نقش مهمی در بازسازی میدان سنت و مذهب بازی کردند. اما پس از انقلاب بهتدریج این وضعیت دوباره تحول یافت و اینبار این روشنفکران دینی بودند که در مسیر عرفی شدن قرار گرفتند و حتی به روشنفکری عرفی نزدیک شدند. روش و نظریۀ مورد استفاده در این پژوهش، برگرفته از نظریۀ کنش «پیر بوردیو» و روش ساختیابی او است.
Most serious studies and sources on how secular intellectuals have responded to modernity and the West either do not pay significant attention to the evolution of their perspectives over contemporary history or assume that their habitus and discursive productions have remained largely unchanged. However, a closer examination reveals that, in different periods of contemporary history, these transformed discursive products have at times drawn closer to religious intellectuals and at other times moved away from them. Studying these fluctuations can shed new light on historical transformations and the role of intellectuals in mobilizing the public politically. Accordingly, the central question of this research is: What transformations have occurred in the discursive products produced within the field of secular intellectualism in response to the West from the Constitutional Revolution to the post-Islamic Revolution period? The study's findings indicate that, during the Constitutional era, secular intellectuals generally viewed the West and modernity with a sense of astonishment and later admiration, considering imitation—and ultimately replication of the West—as the solution to Iran’s underdevelopment. However, due to empirical, historical, and cognitive factors, this positive perspective toward the West and modernity shifted in the 1960s and 1970s. During this period, a significant segment of secular intellectuals, by moving closer to religious intellectuals, played a crucial role in reconstructing the field of tradition and religion. Following the Revolution, however, this dynamic gradually shifted again, as religious intellectuals increasingly moved toward secularization and even approached secular intellectualism.This study employs Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of practice and his structuration methodology as its theoretical and methodological framework.
Keywords: Intellectuals, secular intellectuals, discursive market, Bourdieu, transformation of habitus in the intellectual field.
Intellectuals in any society play a major role in constructing definitions, facts, and events by producing and validating certain ideas, beliefs, and policies and delegitimizing other linguistic products. Since the confrontation with the West has been, if not the most important, at least one of the most important challenges facing the Iranian subject, studying how intellectuals responded to this confrontation and their effective role in inspiring and politically mobilizing broad segments of society in this confrontation will be of great importance in the study of contemporary Iranian history. In general, in the contemporary intellectual field of Iran, two types of intellectuals can be distinguished in a general division: secular intellectuals and religious intellectuals. These two intellectual groups have sometimes had different positions on different events (including the confrontation with the West and modernity) and have produced different linguistic capitals and products. Following these different positions and their evolution in different periods is an important and fascinating discussion that has received little attention. Therefore, the main question of this research is what evolution has occurred in the verbal goods produced in the field of secular intellectualism in the face of the West from the Constitutional era tothe Islamic Revolution? The method and theory used in this research are derived from Pierre Bourdieu's theory of action and his structuration method.
Habits of the secular intellectual field during the Constitutional period: Simultaneously with the Qajar government in Iran, the West was following its path of prosperity and progress in the wake of scientific, technological, economic, and political developments, and in the eyes of the Iranian thinker, it appeared to be a wonderland that, although it had its shortcomings and could be criticized in some cultural and moral aspects, was progressing and well-defined in economy, politics, health, education, industry, etc. In contrast, Iran was a backward country, plagued by disease, poverty, and corruption, tyranny, lawlessness, and in a word, backwardness. Mirza Malekum Khan, Talibov, Akhundzadeh, Malek al-Mutakalemin, Taghizadeh, and most intellectuals of this period shared this perception of Iran. After raising the issue and declaring the pain of backwardness, and of course determining the desired and ideal situation in the West, the secular intellectuals of this period began to produce linguistic goods in which solutions and treatments for the pain were presented. In most of these solutions and therapeutic prescriptions, elements of modernity (such as trust in human reason and science, Western-style science education, democracy and law) were the saviors, and the West was considered the model and example of this salvation.
In the view of the secular intellectuals of this period, the components of modernity such as human reason, respect for man and his rights, the acquisition of knowledge, the demand for the formulation and implementation of law, and freedom of thought will not only create better people, but also a more organized and advanced society. The production of linguistic goods with the keywords of progress, transformation, civilization, progress, and civilization in the intellectual field of this period had become the domain of the field, and by producing goods appropriate to it, they turned modernization into the symbolic capital of the field. Thus, this symbolic capital and established domains in the common intellectual field continued in the following years and decades, even until the Pahlavi era, and did not change much. Many secular intellectuals were defenders of Reza Khan Mirpanj and saw him as a powerful leader who could take this path during the transition period. But this process stopped for multiple reasons and then took a completely different path.
For many reasons, such as the objective and subjective effects of World War I and World War II on Iranian society; the 1953 coup and the role of the US government in it; the defense of Western governments against the Pahlavi dictators, and the spread of leftist intellectual movements in the world, caused this positive image of the West and modernity to be overturned.
The Habitus of Secular Intellectuals in the 1960s and 1970s (i.e. 1340s and 1350s Shamsi): The most significant habitus of intellectuals in the 1960s and 1970s (i.e. 1340s and 1350s Shamsi) was their commitment to political and social engagement. Intellectuals were perceived as the sensitive pulse of society, expected to be its vocal advocate in addressing social and political challenges. Based on this commitment, intellectuals were compelled to take a stance on the most critical confrontation of Iranian society—its encounter with the West.
The conception of the West presented in the secular intellectual discourse of this period was fundamentally different from that of the Constitutional Era intellectuals. In this new image, the West itself was entangled in various crises and in need of remedy, which, it was believed, could be found in Eastern traditions, including Islamic culture and spirituality.
While Constitutional Era intellectuals regarded tradition as an impediment to progress and considered its eradication a prerequisite for advancement, the new generation of intellectuals viewed the revival of tradition as the first step forward and labeled it as an authentic cultural foundation. These intellectuals began to see religion, mysticism, and Islam as sources of spiritual and ethical strength and as solutions to the crises of their time.
In addition to critically reassessing their own historical role, secular intellectuals simultaneously emphasized the significance of religious scholars and Islam, acknowledging their motivating and dynamic power. They actively contributed to reconstructing the image of tradition, elevating its status in intellectual discourse.
The Islamic Revolution and the Transformation of Secular Intellectual Discourse: Following the Islamic Revolution, the linguistic and symbolic capital of secular intellectuals underwent a rapid transformation. Before the revolution, revolutionary actors had shared a common discourse in producing concepts and linguistic capital. However, after the revolution’s victory, competition over the ownership of the symbolic capital that had been created intensified both within the intellectual sphere and between the intellectual sphere and other fields (such as politics, religious institutions, and other producers of linguistic capital).
In this contest, for reasons requiring separate investigation, the secular intellectual field ultimately lost its position in the production and reconstruction of symbolic linguistic capital, surrendering it to other domains. The dominant power in the intellectual and political discourse shifted to the religious institutions and Islamic groups. These groups, adopting a critical stance toward the secular intellectuals’ linguistic and conceptual frameworks, sought to exclude them from public discourse—and to a large extent, they succeeded.
At the same time, due to internal fragmentation and lack of cohesion, secular intellectuals themselves failed to package and present new linguistic products in a way that could gain acceptance and be transformed into symbolic capital. As a result, they largely ceded the linguistic market to their opponents. Furthermore, for at least several decades, they lost their common language with the masses. Over time, due to various sociopolitical factors, the intellectual sphere gradually lost its privileged position in producing linguistic capital altogether.
References
Bidet, jacques (1979) Questions to pierre Bourdieu, Critique of Anthropology.
Carig, Calhoun (1995) Bourdieu Perspectives, Polity Press.
آجدانی، لطف‌الله (1399) روشنفکران ایران در عصر مشروطیت، تهران، اختران.
آخوندزاده، میرزا فتحعلی (2537) رساله قرتیکا، مقالات فلسفی، ویراستۀ حسین محمدزاده صدیق، تهران، کتاب ساوالان.
آدمیت، فریدون (1349) اندیشه¬های فتحعلی آخوندزاده، تهران، خوارزمی.
------------ (1363) اندیشه¬های طالبوف تبریزی، تهران، دماوند.
آشوری، داریوش (1376) ما و مدرنیت، تهران، موسسۀ فرهنگ صراط.
براهنی، رضا (1351) قصۀ غامض تعهد، فردوسی، سال بیست و چهارم، شمارۀ 1074، صص 20- 24.
---------- (1393) تاریخ مذکر: علل تشتت فرهنگ ایران، تهران، نگاه.
بوردیو، پی‌یر (1387) دربارۀ تلویزیون و سلطۀ ژورنالیسم، ترجمۀ ناصر فکوهی، تهران، آشیان.
---------- (1380) نظریۀ کنش، دلایل عملی و انتخاب عقلانی، ترجمۀ مرتضی مردیها، تهران، نقش و نگار.
پرهام، مهدی (1353) «آزادی بردگان انرژی»، مجله نگین، سال دهم، شماره 107، صص 5-8.
---------- (1354) «فرهنگ تعاون»، مجلۀ نگین، سال یازدهم، شماره 130، صص 155-160.
---------- (1357) «جمهوری اسلامی و مسئله زنان»، نگین، سال چهاردهم، اسفند، شماره 164، صص 7-12.
بروجردی، مهرزاد (1377) روشنفکران ایرانی و غرب، تهران، فرزان روز.
پورزکی، گیتی (1379) متفکران غربی و متجددین ایرانی دوران مشروطه، پایان¬نامه کارشناسی-ارشد استاد راهنما دکتر سیف زاده، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دانشکده علوم انسانی واحد تهران مرکزی.
حجاریان، سعید (1380) «عرفی شدن در سپهر سیاست»، نشریه بازتاب اندیشه، مهر، شمارۀ 19، صص 309- 333.
خامه¬ای، انور (1357) «تحلیل علمی از وضع کنونی/ قسمت دوم- بررسی استراتژی و تاکتیک جنبش»، مجله نگین، شماره 161، صص 56-58.
ذاکری، قاسم (1402)، گرایش تدریجی روشنفکران ایرانی به اسلام سیاسی، تهران، ایران.
زعیم، کوروش (1379) جبهه ملی ایران، تهران، ایران مهر.
سروش، عبدالکریم (1385الف) «سنت روشن¬فکری دینی»، ماهنامۀ مدرسه، بهمن، شمارۀ 5، صص 15-19.
--------------- (1385ب) بسط تجربۀ نبوی، تهران، صراط.
شاملو، احمد (1358) «روشن¬فکران و انقلاب»، کتاب جمعه، سال اول، شهریور، جلد 5، صص 6-12.
طالبوف، عبدالرحیم (2536) کتاب احمد، تهران، شب‌گیر.
--------------- (1357) سیاست طالبی، مقاله ملکی، به¬ کوشش رحیم رئیس¬نیا و علی کاتبی، تهران، علم.
فاطمی، فریدون (1347) شبح جدید، شبح روشنفکری، مجلۀ نگین، شمارۀ 38، صص 62- 65 ------------- (1349) رسالت پایان یافته رسالت نویسنده، نقد ادبیات چیست سارتر، مجلۀ نگین، شمارۀ 59، صص 20- 23.
قابوسی، فرهاد (1351) «مسیح به جهان بازمی¬گردد»، مجله فردوسی، سال بیست¬وچهارم، شماره 1084، صص 9-11.
قریشی، فردین (1390) بازسازی اندیشه دینی در ایران، تهران، قصیده‌سرا.
کسمایی، علی¬اکبر (1349) قرن دیوانه (بحران تمدن و فرهنگ نادانی¬های دوران دانش)، تهران، بعثت.
مجتهد شبستری، محمد (1379) نقدی بر قرائت رسمی از دین، تهران، طرح نو.
میرزا ملکم‌خان (1325) مجموعه آثار میرزا ملکم‌خان، به ¬کوشش هاشم ربیع‌زاده، تهران، مطبعه مجلس.
----------- (1307) روزنامۀ قانون، رمضان، شمارۀ 3.
نراقی، احسان (1354) غربت غرب، چاپ دوم، امیرکبیر.
---------- (1356) طمع خام، تهران، توس.
وحدت، فرزین (1402) رویارویی فکری ایران با مدرنیت، مترجم مهدی حقیقت خواه، تهران، ققنوس.
Bidet, jacques (1979) Questions to pierre Bourdieu, Critique of Anthropology.
Carig, Calhoun (1995) Bourdieu Perspectives, Polity Press.
