By this I am referring to the special human belief, based upon

the expediences of one's school in regard to human society and

one's attitude towards it. The sociology of a school of thought first

defines what it recognizes as the reality of society and secondly,

how it has come to know it from the intellectual and ideological

point of view. This is because the social view in a school of thought

holds commitment to society as a doctrine for its ideology. It is not

just a question of analysis of society without an aim or constraints.

    In a school of thought, the sociology is in harmony with the

inclinations, ideals and special views of that school. Based upon

this, it judges, criticizes and evaluates. It is oriented and has

commitment like the views of Durkheim and Gurwitsch as op-

posed to the sociologies most often offered at universities where

the aim is only to analyze and come to know relationships and

phenomena, to study exactly what exists as it is and as one sees it,

to simply study effects, as it were, without any attention being

given to causes.

    The sociology of the 19th century was mainly an ideological

one or as Europeans say: a committed social view. Today, on the

other hand, along with the general attitude in other sciences, the

emphasis is on distancing science from ideology and even remov-

ing any sense of commitment, holding back from any determina-

tion of good or bad. In regard to value judgments, it is deemed that

the sociology should only judge the realities instead of turning to

good or evil, offering solutions and guidance and accepting respon-

sibility or social, ethical or even human commitment. In general, it

refuses to accept an idea or adopt a determined direction or goal in

either theory or practice. Instead of evaluation and guidance, it

turns to fact-finding and analyses.

    It has also announced the thesis: Having commitment, an

ideology or a goal will harm science and will limit it to the frame-

work of determined or particular ideologies, to particular beliefs. It

will automatically take the issuein hand. It will direct it towards the

goal in which it has faith. As a result, science, instead of objectively

searching for the truth, whatever it may be, will be obliged to seek

pre-determined results which serve and confirm the belief system.

    This is because, in this view, a 'committed researcher' (some-

one committed to religion or atheism, spirituality or materiality,

socialism or capitalism, freedom or dictatorship, etc.) can naturally

not be free. One cannot be a researcher who has unlimited or

unbounded opinions so that nothing will influence one's research

and taint any result one may attain.

    For instance, a committed sociologist cannot be an objective

and free scholar of history. Why? Because in the study of history,

one just looks for class struggle. Whenever one finds it, it confirms

one's view and whenever one does not find it, he/she justifies it.

Wherever one finds something that opposes this view, one ignores

it. Sometimes one does not even see it and cannot see it because one

is wearing glasses colored with one's particular ideological views.

    The same is true, in this view, of a religious physicist who

continuously searches for God in one's scientific research. In con-

trast to this person, a materialistic physicist sees everywhere to be

empty of God. Thus, only that researcher can objectively under-

stand the physical world as it really is who is free of both of these

bonds.

    We see how firm these arguments are and, from one point of

view, they are sound in the sense that we saw in the Middle Ages,

because of religious commitment, science and research were obliged

to only prove those truths which had previously been suggested by

the religious scholars. They attained results which Christianity had

predetermined.

    In the 19th century, the sciences, in particular, the social sci-

ences like history and sociology, so strongly opposed the scientist

having a belief system and predetermined ideas fixed by various

parties involving the laws of ideological class or anti-class, racism

or nationalism to the extent that a kind of neo-scholasticism ap-

peared. Science, which had been freed from serving religion in the

Middle Ages, in the new century, was now employed by a school

of thought.

    The necessity for releasing science from the narrow constraints

of ideologies, its commitment to proving a party's position and

justifying the racial, national, class, political and economic desires

of the ideologists and philosophers created a most suitable situ-

ation so that because of one skillful error, those who supported this

view were able to separate science from its mission and essential

responsibility to serve humanity and to bring consciousness and

guidance to the people.

    In their study of realities in the search for truth, they isolated

and separated science from the people with arguments like 'objec-

tive truth', 'free research', 'pure science', 'the non-commitment of

thescientist', 'avoidingprejudgments', 'pre-fabricated ideas',which

were all attractive and logical. This was particularly true with the

social sciences such as history, sociology and literature which, more

than other fields, could being consciousness to the intellectuals and

guidance to the masses throughout the whole world.

    What happened was that, using these arguments, modern

science could no longer propose solutions, make judgment values,

determine directions, explain aims, prove or deny ideas, give

methods for procedure, show the way, criticize existing realities,

suggest proposals for improvement or foresee suitable situations.

It basically studied and analyzed problems, made unknown scien-

tific matters clear and, discovered logical causes and effects in

phenomena. There was no longer the mission of prophetic-like

guidance.

    Science has been separated from the fabric of society. It has lost

touch with people's thoughts. Not being able to criticize the present

situation, it could no longer help solve life's problems. It could no

longer guide society in the direction it should, making the essential

elements clear, causing public ignorance to decline and helping

human beings realize the causes of their past and present miseries.

It no longer concerned itself with the fate of society and its ability

to control its own destiny and achieve its ideals.

    Just like the pious and devoted people who are isolated by their

piety, thereby making them easy prey for plundereers, impious

and deceiving people, proponents of 'objectivity', in the name of

'objectivity', separated science from its commitment and responsi-

bility to bring consciousness, illumination, guidance and help to

human beings so that science could better achieve their goals and

targets.

    Sociology and history developed from this. Neither do objec-

tive historians nor missionless sociologists describe what has passed

or is passing for human beings nor what they must do nor in what

lies their salvation. They were negligent of the fact that when they

put aside their commitment to humanity and they became unre-

stricted by and indifferent to an aim or goal, they were then used as

tools by those who play with history and the powerful elements of

society in order to help them reach their aims!

    By separating science from its service to people and its re-

sponsibility to bring perfection, consciousness and salvation to

society, it automatically was used to serve the enemies of the

people. It became a tool to further the decline, ignorance, intellec-

tual and social servitude of the human being. As we see today, the

natural sciences have been released from their commitment to

search out the truth of the universe or to prove or deny the existence

of God, but for all practical purposes, it has become the slave of

capitalism.

    Sociology is no longer disturbed by faith as it was in the Middle

Ages nor by an ideology as it has been in recent centuries. It has

become a science which proposes research and teaching behind

closed doors. It is used to saturate the egos of the professors, to

amuse the students or to show secret, imperialist-oriented institu-

tions how to humiliate, deviate and plunder the Western masses

and/or deprived Eastern nations. It serves capitalist or anti-popu-

lar organizations by developing ways and means whereby they can

dilute, pollute and essentially destroy the human spirit, resulting in

man's stagnation and deterioration.

    I accept the argument that prejudgement and ideological

dogmatism hurts scientific research and that the scientist who

already believes that he knows what the truth is cannot be a good

scientist because research means exploring, analyzing, explaining

and measuring the problems in order to find the truth. The physi-

ologist who previous to making any study believes that the 'soul'

exists or does not exist, certainly cannot find the real truth. A

believing capitalist or communist when he begins to study history

in order to find the truth and understand the intellectual movement

of history, will finally discover those very truths that he already

believed in.

    The Tradition which clearly states; "Anyone who interprets the

Quran with his own 'opinion' will be burnt in a fire," explains the

said scientific principle.

    'Opinion' here is the same as pre-judgement. It is a pre-judg-

ment which either consciously or unconsciously makes the scientist

change the meaning of the Quran so that it agrees with his own pre-

determined opinion, instead of interpreting its meaning. It is for

this reason that we see when Sunnis, Shi'ites, Sufis, philosophers,

etc. study the Quran, they achieve the same results as they had

before they began . The Quran has become a means for proving their

ideas not that they obtain their ideas from it.

    It is both amusing and tragic that someone interpreted the

word 'opinion' in the Tradition as 'intellect', concluding that no one

has the right to interpret the Quran with his own intellect! as if there

were something other than the intellect by which means one

understand something!

    They have purposefully done this so that people will not

understand the Quran. The same was true in the Middle Ages

where the reading and understanding of the Bible and the Penta-

teuch belonged exclusively to the priests and clergymen. They

prevented the translation, interpretation and distribution so that

people would not be able to refer to them. In this way, the books of

salvation remained in the possession of the of ficial religious clergy.

    This same thing has been done with the Quran. By preventing

people from studying the Quran and thinking about it, religious

scholars made it into a book so that only its form remained for the

people. Its spirit, purpose and aim remain unknown. They turned

it into phrases and verses of secret words without their meaning

being understood. As has been pointed out and as the Quran

warned, they interpreted the Quran with their own pre-conceived

ideas and not with their minds or the use of logic.

    Thus, there are two basic theories. The first - science at, the ser-

vice of a belief system - makes science the means for justifying pre-

conceived notions. The second - science free of any belief system

and for the sake of science alone - makes science ineffective and

valueless. In the name of objectivity, it lacks purpose. As a result,

the scientist no longer serves the people and society and for all

practical purposes, science is either rendered sterile or is made use

of to serve the powerful, wealthy and/or deceivers.

    I propose a third way: Scientists, prior to undertaking any re-

search, must be free of any particular beliefs and after achieving re-

sults, be bound by them.

    Before undertaking any study, scientists must not be commit-

ted to the extent that through the studies they are about to under-

take, they will, of necessity, prove their own pre-conceived notions.

Rather, the results of the research itself, not researchers, should

show the truth to them and then this proven truth become a belief

for researchers. After realizing the truth, they should be committed

to it and realize their responsibility to it as well as their responsibil-

ity towards people and their times for their own scientific con-

sciousness. That it, the belief or idea which their research proved to

them.

    This way, then, neither enslaves science nor confirms pre-con-

ceived ideas. It does not prevent science from performing its

function of guidance and showing the way of salvation to the

people. It does not remove it from seeing to the needs of the human

being, service to human society, criticizing, offering solutions and

showing truth and falsehood. It does not isolate science in the

university nor is it to be used exclusively by the powerful opportun-

ists or those who wish to deceive.

    Sociologists, historians or anthropologists should not allow

their knowledge to be used to justify and confirm their pre-con-

ceived and unscientific notions. They should not allow those who

believe to use science as a means to their goals. Neither should they

stop with this knowledge, that is, be satisfied with a logical and

scientific analysis and explanation of the causes of history, society

and present day human beings.

    Rather, after discovering the truth, after an objective and

unprejudiced search, they should present both the negative and

positive causes and effects. They should guide the people in a

prophetic-like way. They should recall the causes for the back-

wardness and degeneration of society or class or human kind, in

general - attained through objective research and then show the

way to progress and salvation. They should endeavor upon this

way and become committed to it, neither 'science for ideology' nor

'science for science's sake'. Rather: A guiding science committed to

truth. Commitment to a belief before research harrns science and

deceives people but commitment to a belief after research is the

prophetic-like mission of the scientist.
 
 

Philosophy of History
 
 

    Some believe history to be useless. One of the people who did

not believe in history was Napoleon. He said: "History is no more

than lies which are accepted by all."

    There are some famous people who looked at history as an art

and not a science. One believed that history is not an objective

reality like a mountain, nature, a sea, a man, a society or life itself

but it is a poem. The poem is not an outdated reality which the poet

discovers. Rather, the poet uses different substances and creates a

poem. He invents it and creates that which had not existed. Using

the same argument, history is the poem that a historian sings and

not an external reality which he discovers. One historian sings it in

one way and another in another. In this way, everyone sings it as he

wishes it sung or as he is able to sing.

    A contemporary Frenchman says the same thing but with more

seriousness: "History is like a mountain for which I - like everyone

else - make my own blocks of stone in order to construct the design

that I myself have. That is, I enter history and select anything and

any shape which I wish, cut and change it and then use the selected

pieces in the construction of an historical building where I myself

am the designer, builder and architect.

    For example, the history of the French Revolution is not a

reality that historians discover and then express. The historian

creates it. It is the aforementioned mountain that an historian starts

to build according to his own tastes, beliefs, needs and creative

ability by selecting the blocks of stone for the construction of the

history he wishes to have been.

    But the philosophy of history does not believe that history is

separate accidents of the past, accidents made by personalities, the

powerful, military leaders, heroes and conquerors. It does not see

history as material, stored in the past that a writer select according

to his own needs and tastes.

    History is the continuous and united process which moves and

grows from the beginning of the life of humanity according to the

deterministic scientific law of cause and effect. It coercively passeS

through different stages and encounters deterrnined points-

which can be foreseen. Finally, it certainly and of necessity reacheS

its goals which were pre-determined by the law of the movement

of history.

    Just as a plant or a chicken grows up or like the earth moveS

within a certain period of time, so history is a living, natural reality-

Thus, according to scientific laws and the principles of cause and

effect, it has its own movement and evolution. Consequently, it is

not a tool to be made use of by this or that person. It is also not an

illogical or accidental process without having any goal.

    As the flow of history is a scientific one, if I found myself in the

middle of this flow, if I accurately discover the laws of movement

of history, I can foresee the destiny of any society or other societieS

three hundred years from now. It is Xust like meteorology whereby

knowing the laws of the atmosphere, which are logical laws of

cause and effect, one can accurately foresee the changes of weathert

the rising and falling of temperatures, the possibility of rain, the

coming of clouds, the occurrence of a storm and the blowing of

winds.

    Therefore, if we discover the flow of the movement of history,

we can guess what will happen in the future. A person who adheres

to Ws principle, who believes in a philosophy of history or better

yet, a science of history, believes that history is a scientiffc reality

and a movement which flows according to fixed scientific laws.

Therefore, the destiny of humanity throughout the ages is not

accidental. It is not made by persons nor does it stand, move, incline

or progress according to the desires of Ws or that person. It moveS

according to coercive, existing scientific laws which exist in the

very fabric of society and time. This movement which occurs

according to scientific law in society is called 'history'.

    Therefore, history is a continuous, deterministic flow which

moves according to certain strict laws. This is to believe in the

philosophy of history.

    But how does it move? According to which scientific laws?

How can they be foreseen? Which direction does it take? The

answer to these questions creates the special philosophy of history

of each school of thought. Every school of thought replies to these

according to its own views. As the 'science of history' has not as yet

been discovered or has not, as yet, been completely recognized and

accepted by all, we design it in an ideological school as the 'philoso-

phy of history' and not as a proven, confirmed and fixed science.
 
 

Ideology

    Ideologys includes both a belief and the knowing of it. It is to

have a special attitude and consciousness which a person has in

relation to himself, his class position, social base, national situation,

world and historic destiny as well as the destiny of one's own

society which one is dependent upon. According to one's ideology,

oneexplains the above pointsand on thatbasisone finds one's own

particular responsibilities, commitments, directions, solutions,

desires, positions and judgments. Consequently, he adheres to a

special behavior and ethical system of values. That is, it is according

to the world view and fundamental type of sociology, philosophi-

cal anthropology and philosophy of history that a person has, his

beliefs about life, the relationship to 'self' with others and with the

world.

    It makes it clear how one must live, what one must do, what

type of society must be made, how an ideal social system is created,

what the responsibilities and commitments of an individual to

one's society are, what types of conflicts, relationships, ideas,

needs, beliefs, negative or positive values, collective behavior,

scales of good and evil, social and humanitarian identity must be

created and established.

    Therefore, ideology is a belief system that interprets the social,

rational and class orientation of a human being as well as one's sys-

tem of values, social order, form of living, ideal individual, social

situation and human life in all its various dimensions. It answers

the questions: What are you like? What do you do? What must you

do? What must be?

    The various aspects of infrastructure (i.e. world view) and

suprastructure (philosophical anthropology, sociology and phi-

losophy of history forming an ideology) find meaning, can be

understood and turned into life and movement in a school, when

two points are made clear: Its views on the ideal city and the ideal

human being.
 
 

The Ideal Society (Utopia)

    Utopia is the ideal society that one conceives of in one's own

mind, desires and struggles for so that human society take that

form. All philosophies, religions and human beings have a differ-

ent type of utopia in their minds. Paradise is the utopia or ideal

society in the mind of a religious man. Plato's utopia was the ideal

city for the aristocratic Greeks and intellectuals of his age. The City

of God of St. Augustine, The Sacred City of Jean Isolah and the

Society of Universal Justice of the Shitites, at the end of time, are all

ideal societies.

    In many of the ancient books, ideal cities such as philosophy of

Jabalwa and Jabalsa have been described - cities with idealistic peo-

ple, government, religion, political organization, social classes,

ethics, economics, social fundamentals, thought and culture. There-

fore, contrary to what is superficially stated, the creation of utopias

is the result of a need of every idealistfior goal-oriented person.

    All of this shows that the desire to have a higher form of society

exists both in the primordial nature of each and every human being

as well as in the consciousness of each society. It is the manifestation

of the evolving spirit of each human being.

    This 'higher form of society' in a school of thought is not an

imaginary or fictitious society but an ideal society which is formed

from the ideology of that school of thought. This is because the be-

lievers of each school of thought believe in a human, free and ideal

way of life and not only believe in the possibility of such a life and

its certainty, but struggle to create it.

    The desired, the ideal or higher form of society is the ideal men-

tal image of that society which an individual or group who believe

in that school of thought have about it and they try to change

human society for that type of society.

    Essentially, the existence of an imaginary society proves that

the human being is always moving from the 'present situation' to

a more 'desirable situation', whether it be imaginary, scientific, the

utopia of Plato or the classless society of Marx. But the desirable

society in a school of thought is a scientific and potentially objective

society which is in harmony with the spirit and orientation of that

school of thought, based upon its world view and is in accordance

with its ultimate goal and the philosophy of life in that school.
 
 

Ideal Prototype

    The ideal human being is motivated by a desire as to what he

'should be' and 'must become'. It was this person that the mystics

sought to become. The universal prototype (insan-i-kamil) is clearly

referred to in our treatises, particularly the ones on philosophy and

illumination. It is the person who has reached the highest level that

a human being can reach and evolve towards . It is a person who has

released the 'self' from the bond of 1ust' and 'passion' and has

soared as a human being.

    Fascism speaks of a 'superman'. Nietzsche speaks about the

man who becomes the heir of the gods. Hegel, in his philosophy of

history, which is based upon his special idealism, foresees a future

in which the 'absolute ideal', after passing the evolutionary stages

of self-awareness of the highest form of man, reaches 'absolute

awareness' and in this stage, the universal prototype.

    The ethical socialism of the 1 9th century in Gerrnany, which the

majorityof Hegel's studentsbelieved in, wastrying to attain the hu-

man being of a 'sound disposition', 'the human being who is

human', whose talents have progressed freely and soundly by

struggling against both bourgeoisie 'this worldliness' and pious

'other worldliness' for both of these make a person defective,

metamorphosized and alienated from the truth of 'self' and one's

primordial nature.

    Even Marxism, which is based on 'materialism' and as our

intellectuals explain it, 'the human being' to them is an economic

animal, speaks about 'a total human being'. This person is one who

is total, perfect and complete. He has not become imperfect, para-

lyzed, cut into pieces or alienated. He has not been made insane by

the system or been metamorphosized. He does not suffer from a

sense of self-loss. He does not worship wealth. He is not one-

dimensional. He is neither a colonizer nor colonized. He is neither

a master nor a slave. He is not a seeker after lusts, a monk or an

ascetic. He is not a worker who is without work because of the

existence of reactionary and deviated elements, economic condi-

tions, class system and inhumane working conditions.

    Therefore, all schools of thought, whether materialistic or mys-

tic, have a mental concept of a 'perfect type', a total person, an ideal

prototype of humanity. Otherwise, a social philosophy, an ethical

school of thought and a path to follow in one's life is meaningless

because it lacks orientation.

    A human model is a model which gives direction and causes us

to move. It requires that both our hands and our thoughts be put to

use in seeking or reaching towards that model.

    The model can be used as a scale of life, an ethics, a means of

training and teaching human beings. It is not possible to discipline

human beings without recognizing the universal prototype and

without having a universal prototype for the human race. We must

know the potential human being in order to create that person by

means of a developed, accurate and scientific technique or method.

    Discipline means 'becoming a human being' and bringing one

near to the universal prototype. If we ask those who are engaged

in the training of the human being what is intended for each person

to become, they cannot answer that such a problem is of no concern

because they intend to change the present position of the human

being. Therefore, the universal prototype must be clear and it be

made known what type of person it is.

    They cannot argue: "We are experts and are only responsible

for their training and teaching. The universal prototype does not

concern us. It is up to philosophy and religion to make it clear."

Such training and teaching is similar to a carpenter who has

gathered a hundred pieces of equipment and various kinds of

wood and is expertly working on those but when you ask him what

he is working on, he answers: "I have no idea. I am a realist. I am not

an idealist. I just cut wood but I have no idea what it is for and who

will use it."

    We must consider the point that the system of human values is

determined by the universal prototype who is in our thoughts and

whom webelieve in as a model humanbeing, a symbolic model, the

exalted human being that we must be and yet are not. The main aim

and effort of training and teaching is to make human beings grow

more similar to that model generation by generation. Therefore,

each school of thoughtmust present its ideal image of the universal

prototype, otherwise all its efforts are in vain and its movement,

without aim.

    It must be noted here that a universal prototype or society

which moves towards exalted symbols, ideal and exemplary models

always destroys fixed moulds and standards upon its way. The

universal prototype individual or society is the attractive force

which identifies the orientation of a movement but does not iden-

tify the final or fixed form.

    It is the factor of movement which negates the immobile and

prohibiting factors. Fixed standards put the human being in pre-

constructed forms and dimensions. It moulds the person as it wants

while seeking the ideal it releases an individual from these forms

and takes that person out of the stagnancy of each course of action

and system. It moves the person in the streams of time towards the

ocean and/or absolute eternity.

    Therefore, as I mentioned at the beginning of my lecture, just as

I do not believe in fixed and pre-constructed moulds, similarly I do

not believe in non-engagement, non-commitment and irresponsi-

bility. Instead of release or limitations, I believe the orientation

must be selected not in its 'form of being' nor 'in being without

form' but rather as an eternal evolutionary becoming, an eternal

movement and migration - not to reach a point - but to orient

towards a direction.

    Therefore, a design for a school of thought consists of an infras-

tructure of a world view and a suprastructure of a philosophy in

regard to the human being, society and a philosophy of history (the

principal pillars) forming one's ideology, developing the ideal

society and the ideal human being.
 

Figure - 1