Dostoevsky vs. Qutb
Reader comment on item: Ahmadinejad or Mousavi?

Submitted by linda (United States), Jun 21, 2009 at 00:44

In the finaly analysis, it doesn't matter who is in charge. From The Lion and the Mouse: Dostoevsky and the Hideous Schizophrenia of the West, by Jack Moran, Associate Prof. of Political Science and International Affairs, Kennesaw State Univ., Georgia:

Prepared for the 2006 American Political Science Association Conference Philadelphia Marriott Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Saturday, Sep 2, 2006 (4:15 PM) Panel: 41-6 Morality, Power, and Politics in Literature Abstract: It is the argument of this paper that a clearer understanding of the "schizophrenia" described by Sayyid Qutb and other Islamic fundamentalist thinkers might enable Westerners to grapple more effectively with the ideology of Islamic fundamentalism.

At the very core of Qutb's critique of the modern West is his analysis of the West's contradictory nature – its "distinction between religion and life." Importantly, there is nothing uniquely Islamic about this message, a point that could not be made more clear than in comparing Qutb's concern about Western schizophrenia with that of one of the most devout Christian novelists read in the West, Fyodor Dostoevsky.

By examining his novel, The Idiot, this paper intends to address Dostoevsky's understanding of the conflicted nature of the West and its effects upon those who live within it. Ultimately Dostoevsky not only gives us a clear (and disapproving) picture of Western "schizophrenia," but he comes to a very different conclusion about how to deal with it than did Qutb. He seemed to anticipate the empty promises of the grandiose, utopian philosophies which promised an end to societal contradictions (nationalism, fascism, Marxism, and Islamic fundamentalism).

Indeed, he foresaw the one pivotal lesson of the 20 th century – any imposed solution to end the modern world's schizophrenia is far worse than the original condition to begin with.

http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/5/2/5/9/pages152597/p152597-1.php

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.