36 Years After the Revolution; Where Does the Iranian Intellectual Stand?

Philosophy is the prelude and mother of modern knowledge. Sciences are born from the tradition of questioning and skepticism about current knowledge, a tradition that, by constantly challenging existing laws and order, is the main driver of progress. Modern sciences stand on the pillars of philosophy; in other words, the foundation of modern knowledge is based on concepts, rational structures, and a critical and truth-seeking perspective. Democracy is built on this vast foundation and, following centuries of thought and the establishment of a tradition of questioning and redefining concepts, has taken shape. Experience has shown that a totalitarian and monologic viewpoint hinders the emergence of an appropriate environment for the growth and development of alternative thinking and serious challenges and critiques against the prevailing power. The tradition of questioning and understanding and creating concepts is the most important achievement of philosophy and a prerequisite for transformation. Understanding and explaining the role of the individual in society and their relationship with social contracts is one of the first steps in reopening the breathing space of civil society. This importance, alongside recognizing and creating concepts based on a mutable worldview, truth-seeking, anti-violence, and acceptance of others, are prerequisites for creating a suitable environment for civil action that leads to the establishment of a culture of democracy. The century-long experience of Iran and the recent revolutions in Arab countries have generally shown that without considering the context of law and democratic institutions and understanding social relations, one cannot hope for positive change. Democracy is not merely an electoral mechanism; reducing it to democratic institutions does not solve the problems of authoritarian societies. In other words, the outcome of elections does not necessarily bring democracy. The culture of democracy, more than having a hardware, legal, and structural aspect, is rooted in truth-seeking, understanding structures and concepts, and creating balance and harmony among power institutions, the people, and various actors in society. Here, it is necessary to distinguish between understanding and education. The conventional educational system in our country is degree-oriented. Emphasis on obtaining degrees does not necessarily lead to an improvement in understanding and motivation for the pursuit of knowledge. In the current educational system, a degree is the final station, and upon obtaining it, the holder can benefit from its privileges. In other words, the university is a bridge to reach social privilege. The production and creation of transformation require understanding. The educational structure based on memorization and recitation is barren in terms of producing thought and looks educationally to the past. The product of this structure is largely incapable of establishing a connection between current realities and needs with its memorized content. This major shortcoming produces a class of elites who are not necessarily in search of understanding concepts and lack the deep understanding necessary for leading society at critical historical junctures. This shortcoming has never harmed our country more than after the 1979 Revolution. Political activists sometimes lacked a correct historical and social understanding of their society. This deficiency, alongside a lack of deep economic and philosophical understanding and a disregard for political ethics, combined with an overconfidence instilled by academic titles, created a terrifying combination that led to the complete negligence of elites and civil society regarding the consequences of blindly following the charisma of Ayatollah Khomeini. This negligence and lack of understanding ultimately left the political space entirely to the violent extremists and paved the way for the machinery of violence and tyranny. In 1979, long before the military abandoned their posts and handed the country over to the revolutionary wave, most intellectuals, elites, and political activists had forgotten their mission of understanding society, the power structure, and adherence to ethics. Thirty-six years have passed since the revolution. What is the current state of our intellectual community? The elite and political society remain in a state of intellectual confusion. The mixing of discussions without considering the temporal and spatial dimensions of the ideas presented, absolute relativism or extreme absolutism, alongside a lack of ethics and accountability, are some of these afflictions. The failure of civil institutions and serious and structural critical thinking is evidence of this confusion. Returning to concepts and structures is the most important necessity for creating change in our country's intellectual sphere. In fact, we must redefine and recognize intellectualism and the intellectual. What intellectualism demands is first understanding the complexities of time and space. In other words, a correct understanding of structures, meanings, and underlying concepts is essential. Understanding the state of society and history is one of the first steps in drawing a correct picture of the possibilities, shortcomings, and opportunities of society. Without acknowledging deficiencies, one cannot hope for progress. Of course, there is a significant difference between realism and feelings of inferiority. Relying on the achievements of human thought is the most important support for moving forward. This movement first requires prioritizing and enhancing understanding. Emphasizing this aspect of reasoning in this article is not without reason. Reviewing the intellectual production of Iranian thinkers, whether in serious texts or in internet and television discussions, sometimes shows a lack of reliable scientific evidence. What can be found abundantly is opinion; however, reliable data is hard to come by. For example, there is little quantitative data regarding our country's economy and culture. Some of this results from the irrationality of the governing system after the revolution; however, one should not overlook the negligence of elites in political and economic sciences. In our country, democracy has generally not been understood correctly; a large part of the proponents of the democracy project in Iran are technocrats who neither have a deep understanding of their society, its limitations, and values nor a correct understanding of the deep underlying meanings and concepts necessary for moving towards democracy. Providing top-down engineering solutions does not help in continuing the system of tyranny. Democracy is not a project that can be advanced with a bulldozer. The technocratic perspective tends to reductionism. This approach is potentially incapable of understanding the overall relationship and ratio among the autonomous actors in society. Reductionism and the tendency to engineer society always confront the inertia of social forces. The proponents of this project, due to their misunderstanding of the mechanisms of structures and the interactions of social actors, are unable to utilize them and create the desired change. Changing the current situation requires accepting individual responsibility alongside social empathy. Eradicating the prevailing foolishness in the political and intellectual arena cannot be achieved with a one-dimensional aggressive and idealistic critical thought. The first step is to expand understanding and create concepts compatible with the time and space of society. The prevailing public discourse must be cleansed of aggression. Absolute relativism and social and individual irresponsibility must give way to empathy, collective thinking, and clarifying the position and mission of thinkers and the responsibilities of citizens. The search for truth first requires knowledge and awareness of the dimensions of existence in various fields. Knowledge and awareness and the renewal of social contracts require replacing the hierarchical system of memorization and recitation with an open structure of understanding and transformation. The best path to a better future is to walk the path of change based on a correct understanding of the history and potential and actual possibilities of the country. The greatest mistake of political actors and many critics of power in the country is that they see politics as a tool to gain and maintain power, while it should be understood as knowledge for managing society and creating balance and harmony among citizens.