Not only does the madrassa produce a poor model of the current world but it also attempts to ‘construct’ the past world from where it asserts its authority w/o gain.
An ailing chimera of faux-past and misplaced-present.
An ailing chimera of faux-past and misplaced-present.
Ofc, institutions by their very nature craft their vision of the past towards utilitarian ends.
That’s not the problem.
The problem is that a system can becomes so disrupted, its communications betray an inefficient relationship with its environment.
That’s not the problem.
The problem is that a system can becomes so disrupted, its communications betray an inefficient relationship with its environment.
It is both less responsive and stuck in a self-referential loop of self-assuredness.
Signaling to its Other neither competence nor the history-mediated authority that it internally supposes it does.
Signaling to its Other neither competence nor the history-mediated authority that it internally supposes it does.
You might have issue with that take but truly, consider for a second, are the ‘ulema’ offered more credence by wider society as the material-progress curve goes up? The answer seems obvious.
Now, ask again, can the system re-aquire said role simply through the circular exercise of asserting that it ought have it?
Or given the variables, can forgoing material aspiration be done in a contentious geopoliticalscape w/o inviting attending horror?
Or given the variables, can forgoing material aspiration be done in a contentious geopoliticalscape w/o inviting attending horror?
Pointing this out may invite questions of fealty but, really, can the brash inquisitors love the thing they claim to defend more than those that would see it enlivened with newfound vigor?
Loading suggestions...