مطالب

The primary objective of this article is to elucidate that a comprehensive understanding of Greek political thought necessitates an examination of its origins in Ancient Greece. Traditional scholarship in Greek political thought has typically assumed that it originated concurrently with philosophy and the establishment of the polis. In this research, drawing upon the visions of Eric Voegelin and Leo Strauss, we endeavor to establish a refined definition of political thought while challenging the aforementioned conventional assumption. It is argued that political reflection remains intimately intertwined with the theological-mythological beginning of thought in Greece. This theological-mythological mode of thinking initially found expression in the works of Homer and Hesiod, with these poets serving as the foremost intellectual authorities and initial educators of the Greeks. The Greeks, in their self-perception, viewed themselves through a lens of religion and in the mirror of gods and divine forces. Consequently, any exploration into Greek political thought must acknowledge the works of these poets as the seminal intellectual foundations of Greek thought. It is imperative to recognize that political thought in Ancient Greece did not commence with philosophy or the emergence of the polis, but rather with poetry and a distinct form of religious-mythical experience, namely theologia-muthologia. 

Regarding the way of facing the West and modernity, Ahmed Fardid is among the thinkers who, by adopting a philosophical and judgmental approach, rejects modernity, philosophy, and western civilization in its entirety. Fardid considers modernity and the West to have an inherent crisis and considers any attempt to patch up modernity with Eastern religions or cultures futile. Fardid, who is the creator of the word “ Gharbzadegi (Westoxification)”, considers human sciences and Western civilization to be nothing more than the inciting soul vanities and blasphemy. By adopting an essentialist and negative approach towards the modern world, he calls for a complete break from the subjectivism and humanism associated with the modern world and a return to Islamic-oriented philosophy (Hekmat-e Onsi). Seyyed Hossein Nasr, as a traditionalist thinker, rejects Western civilization and modernity as a unified whole. He wants to incorporate modern science and reason and take perennial philosophy. In this paper, via a comparative analysis method, this hypothesis is examined that although Fardid and Nasr are sympathizers in the complete negation and rejection of the modern world, Fardid confronts modernity and its consequent subjectivism using Heidegger’s western thought. This is when Nasr confronts modernity from the perspective of a traditionalist thinker who believes in the foundations of tradition. Nasr considers the return to the perennial philosophy to solve confronting the Western world and modernity, but Fardid faced with the modern world, emphasizes that although modernity is the exposure of self-fulfillment, one must strive to overcome it. It is difficult to return to the past.