In my essay on Muslim sociology, published in five languages, I emphasize the importance of sociology for human rights and propose an interdisciplinary approach to the topic, both theoretical and practical. I think that sociology is still too insignificant in the field of human rights and peace research in the Muslim world, which has been plagued by wars and conflicts for decades.
By Milena Rampoldi
Starting from Max Weber’s view, sociology must be an “understanding sociology” that examines social phenomena and penetrates them with interdisciplinary knowledge and skills in order to bring about an internal solution to the challenges associated with the ideology of armament and militarization. True peace in the Middle East requires an active solution at the social and not only political level.
The peace movement from the “bottom” offers such an internal solution. It can make use of “understanding” sociology if it argues in an interdisciplinary and hermeneutic manner and implements the beliefs of an innovative sociology for dynamic transformation and human rights, also at the social level, to actively and dynamically oppose war, colonialism, armaments, and militarization from the “bottom”.
Today, Muslim societies need an internal solution based on a Muslim or Islamic perspective based on egalitarianism and multi-perspectivism. However, a sociology of human rights and peace must above all be based on the participation and competence of Muslim women.
My perspective on overcoming Eurocentric approaches in sociological research on the Muslim world is based on Edward Said’s (1935-2003) statement in his work “Orientalism”, which remains an essential research paradigm for me to this day:
Said aptly writes:
“From the beginning of the nineteenth century until the end of World War II, France and Britain dominated the Orient and Orientalism; since World War II, America has dominated the Orient and approaches it as France and Britain once did. Out of that closeness whose dynamic is enormously productive even if it always demonstrates the comparatively greater strength of the Occident (British, French, or American), comes the large body of texts I call Orientalist”. (See Said W. E., Orientalism, Routledge & Kegan Paul and Henley, London 1978, p. 12.)
The attitude described by Edward Said towards all cultures, societies and religions that are not considered typically Western is “orientalist” in the sense that the so-called Orient is objectified by depriving it of its own subjectivity. In this way, Western culture abuses the dialectically opposite “Orient” to define itself and find its own identity by opposing the so-called “Other”.
Sociology must not be reduced to the academic circles but must apply methods and theories that bring about social change in the Muslim world, in the name of human rights, egalitarianism, social justice and equality.
Precisely for this reason, we need an innovative sociology that communicates and focuses on semantics from an intercultural and multicultural point of view by creating a world of peace, as the researcher A.C. Leyton confirmed in his article in 1956, in which he stated the following: (see Leyton A. C., Semantic Aspects of Sociological Studies, in: Synthese, 10 (1956), p. 270):
“In the sphere of international politics alone it is urgent that the semantic, social and psychological problems inherent in the use of language be examined, and that understanding of them be applied in international consultive bodies and tribunals; urgent if we are to hope for a more secure and more stable world, urgent if ever we are to achieve the rationale for peace.”
The sociological method developed at the interface between hermeneutics, “understanding sociology“, conflict theory in the sense of the German philosopher Karl Marx and world phenomenology in the sense of Edmund Husserl is the reason why I have come to the following conviction: Sociology cannot and must not be positivist and evolutionist in the sense of the French philosopher Auguste Comte and the so-called “first” Western academic sociology. After all, sociology must combine different approaches, and in this way produce an open, flexible and self-innovating paradigm based on doubt, conflict acceptance, multiculturalism and reformism/transformism/social change from within and including the integration of the macro and micro levels of sociological studies and practice.
In this context, I am convinced of the importance of creating a bidirectional relationship between micro- and macro-sociology, because both micro- and macro-sociology must be used to grasp social life and society as a whole and at the same time in detail and/or in-depth.
In my opinion, the foundation of a socialist Muslim peace sociology, which uses feminist approaches originating from Muslim societies as an innovative transformation potential, has an essential importance as well. The interplay between conflict theory and analysis of the living world and the parallel theory and practice on the micro- and macrosociological level make Muslim sociology an instrument for the authentic implementation of active and dynamic peace potentials within the meaning of the Quranic ideals of justice.
In summary, I would like to mention the following:
Muslim sociology is a discipline at the interface of numerous fields of study and should not disregard the importance of theological viewpoints. These can be integrated into a sociology that I would define as follows: it is egalitarian and creationist and promotes social change and equality in society, which contributes to the construction and maintenance of peaceful coexistence.
However, to avoid any kind of fatalist immobilism, we must understand the importance of an open sociological project for Muslim societies where researchers struggle for internal solution based on the core principles of Islamic egalitarianism and on the concepts of justice expressed in the core message of the Quran.
