According to the public relations office of the Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought, the National Conference on the Philosophy of Culture, with an emphasis on the views of Ayatollah Khamenei (may God prolong his shadow), was held on the evening of Wednesday, November 27, 2024, coinciding with World Philosophy Day. The conference took place in the holy city of Qom with the participation of a large number of individuals interested in philosophical discussions.
Hojjat al Islam Masoud Esmaeili, the scientific secretary of the conference, stated during the event: “Philosophy of culture is a relatively new field of study, although philosophers have paid attention to this topic throughout history. As a specific academic discipline, it is only about fifty years old.”
He continued: “This field has been considered by cultural scholars and those concerned with social governance as an opportunity to organize various social systems. It is not solely a philosophical pursuit.”
He added: “The Research Institute has been pursuing this topic since the 1380s (Solar calendar) under the guidance of Ayatollah Rashad, and gradually started offering courses. It seemed that this field needed national collaboration and should not remain confined to certain research environments. It should transform into an academic, research-based, and educational concern, eventually influencing cultural policy-making and governance. Therefore, the Philosophy of Culture Conference was scheduled in 2021.”
Esmaeili further noted that around 30 preparatory meetings were held for the conference, with the call for papers being issued in May of this year. Approximately 10 articles have been accepted, and 10 additional commissioned articles focusing on the thoughts of contemporary philosophers are expected to be submitted by the end of Azar .
He also mentioned that yesterday, in Tehran, 4 specialized roundtables focusing on Western philosophy were held at the Research Institute for Cultural Studies and Human Sciences, and 5 other specialized roundtables were held at Qom University.
Khosrowpanah: Cultural Policies Are Ineffective Without Proper Structure
Hojatoleslam Abdolhossein Khosropanah, in his speech at the National Conference on the Philosophy of Culture, which was held at the Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought in Qom, raised the question: “45 years have passed since the establishment of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, but have its actions been based on the philosophy of culture of the two leaders of the revolution?”
He continued: “To answer this question, we must understand the leader’s perspective and then evaluate the actions of the council. The council has produced various documents, such as the comprehensive scientific document. It has also worked on structural actions, like the approval of Jihad University. Furthermore, the council is responsible for guiding these documents, overseeing their implementation, and tracking and addressing issues.”
The Secretary of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution pointed out that the leader of the revolution has addressed both the essence and the method of culture in his speeches. He emphasized that the best approach is a systematic and jurisprudential method and cautioned against selectively interpreting or distorting the leader’s words.
He further referred to the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, stating: “Culture is not necessarily linked to the past tradition; it partially connects to it, but also involves new developments.”
Khosropanah mentioned that the leader of the revolution emphasizes the need for this council to pursue fundamental cultural transformations seriously by rebuilding the public mindset revolutionarily.
The Secretary of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution stated that the council’s cultural work has not been developed in detail based on the leader’s grand policies. Council members, with the framework of the two revolutionary leaders’ intellectual system, have outlined the country’s cultural map. However, the broader cultural policies have yet to be formulated by the Expediency Discernment Council. He noted that the council’s secretariat has prepared and will submit a document for approval.
He emphasized that in the development of cultural policies, the guiding principles derived from the leader’s perspectives are always taken into account. For instance, before drafting the music policy, the leader’s cultural theory in this field was outlined and then this draft was approved.
Cultural Challenges and the Need for Structural Reform
Professor Khosrowpanah, while addressing the failure of some cultural policies, attributed this to the lack of proper structures and stated: “The written policies on issues like hijab have failed to be effective due to structural weaknesses. However, whenever the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution has succeeded in structuring, better results have been achieved.”
He added: “According to the leader’s view, all governing bodies and civil society organizations must work in coordination under a unified cultural command. However, this structure has not yet been formed, and the budget for cultural institutions is determined by the Program and Budget Organization without the involvement of the council.”
Scientific and Technological Achievements of the Council
The Secretary of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution referred to the council’s achievements in the fields of science and technology and said: “Iran’s success in ranking fourth in nanotechnology and its excellent position in aerospace and traditional medicine are among the results of this council’s efforts. Without this council, Iran would not have reached such a position.”
He added: “In recent years, the balance between the council’s scientific and cultural decisions has improved.”
Professor Khosrowpanah, in conclusion, emphasized the commitment of the council members and stated: “The members of the Cultural Revolution Council are working day and night to improve the culture of the country, and we hope to strengthen the council’s role by relying on the cultural theory of the leader of the revolution.”
Ameli: Today, the West Uses the ‘Persuasion Code’ to Influence the Minds of the Younger Generation
Hojjat Al-Islam Sayyid Saeed Reza Ameli, former Secretary of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, in his speech at the National Conference on the Philosophy of Culture held at the Musavian Hall of the Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought, addressed the essence of the philosophy of culture in three dimensions. He explained the first dimension as a “necessary” and “unnecessary” aspect within Islamic thought. Thus, when we talk about Islamic culture, we are defining what is “necessary” and what is “unnecessary” for a way of life according to Islam.
He continued: “If we approach this topic through the lens of Sadraean philosophy, the essential movement leading to an ideal outcome plays a role in answering what culture is, understood as a ‘necessary’ or ‘unnecessary’ aspect.”
He explained: “Another dimension involves culture as ‘being’ and ‘not being.’ This differs from the third dimension, which is culture as ‘is’ and ‘is not.’ ‘Being’ speaks to a grand totality, while ‘is’ pertains to social and individual existence.”
He added: “In the ‘being’ and ‘not being’ perspective, culture could be seen as something that shapes identity, affirming certain aspects and negating others. However, culture in its general understanding, as ‘is’ and ‘is not,’ is essentially a social phenomenon, and for this reason, it is considered a relative concept.”
Ameli remarked: “Culture is something that operates within the social sphere and deals with various sources. If we look back to the emergence of divine religions, religion and culture were often equivalent. In fact, religion was the main source of culture. However, as Islamic societies began to engage with modern culture, new social processes developed, and culture started drawing from other sources.”
He went on: “Today, we have two ecosystems. The misconception about new technology is that it views the internet and cyberspace as mere tools. The reality is that we now live in two spaces: a geographical, place-based space and a digital, numeric space where all aspects of life are forming.”
He clarified: “Some cultural sources emerge within the social space of our daily life, while others form within the virtual space.”
Ameli continued: “In 2003 in the United States, 200,000 people were trained in the ‘persuasion code,’ which was aimed at those working in advertising. These persuasion codes create a mental monopoly and generate stereotypical views. Many of the media productions today, produced by the West, use persuasion codes to influence the minds of the younger generation.”
The Former Secretary of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution stated:
The two-dimensional life, shapes four significant events in the grand culture. First, it makes culture “hybrid” and “bipolar.” These individuals are driven by two competing motivations, and the situation becomes more complicated when the second event occurs, which is the formation of “dual disorientation” within the individual, leading to uncertain identities that essentially never find a stable position.
He identified the third event as the creation of “a two-dimensional culture with the dominance of Iranian culture,” and the fourth as the creation of “a two-dimensional culture with the dominance of non-Iranian culture,” stating: “A culture dominated by one space will emerge.” He continued: “This can manifest itself in three areas.”
He said: “The first is ‘resistant identities’; these identities are stable and emphasize certain values, such as Islamic resistance. The second group is ‘composite identities,’ which can either solidify or remain indefinite.”
He added: “The third category is ‘legitimized identities,’ which evolve in alignment with the norms of the time and are influenced by the prevailing culture.”
He explained: “If we view this through the lens of Sadraean philosophy toward an elevated existence, we can see that in this dual-space world, capacities have been created that could lead to four transitions: from personal, case-based justice to universal justice; from hierarchical, authoritarian justice to systemic and public justice; from regretful justice to a smart, alert, and action-oriented system; and from discursive justice to actualized justice.”
Qaemi Nia: We Need a Cultural Interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah
Hojjat Al-Islam Qaemi Nia, speaking at the National Conference on the Philosophy of Culture held at the Musavian Hall of the Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought, remarked: “Cognitive science of culture is a vast topic that is frequently discussed in our society. To solve cultural crises, we must pay attention to the mental processes of the members of society.”
He explained that cultural models are a result of artificial intelligence discussions, noting: “AI scientists designed robots that performed various tasks, but these robots often failed to understand what humans wanted because, unlike humans, they lacked behavioral models. These behavioral models, which were discovered by AI researchers, initially had a personal form and then gradually became recognized as having a ‘cultural shape.’ For instance, if you tell someone from Iranian or European society to perform a task, they would do it in different ways, meaning that behind words and actions, specific cultural models exist.”
He continued: “Gradually, anthropology entered the field and analyzed cultural models, realizing that these models are, in fact, specific conceptual structures present in the minds of cultural members. These structures guide the behaviors and thoughts of individuals within a culture. In this analysis, the main domain of culture became the human mind, and cognitive analyses emerged from this point.”
He divided the philosophy of culture into two categories: “One is abstract and mental philosophy of culture, and the other is the concrete and tangible philosophy of culture. What we currently need is to focus on the tangible philosophy of culture.”
The faculty member of the Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought stated: “It seems that the philosophy of culture presented by the leader of the revolution is of the tangible and practical kind. Secondly, cultural models play a central role in his cultural analyses. Thirdly, cultural thinking within the Islamic world has been dormant throughout history, and that shows why thinking of the Islamic revolution’s leader is unique and unparalleled.”
He referred to examples of the leader’s expressions and said: “Cultural models in the leader’s words are mostly metaphorical. Other categories of concepts are visionary concepts, such as ‘insight’ derived from the Quran, or military concepts with cultural connotations, such as ‘cultural blitz.’ Body metaphors also appear in the leader’s speech, such as ‘electoral integrity.’ Existential metaphors are widely present in his discourse.”
He concluded: “In general, the leader’s speech involves high-level modeling thinking. Models have their own algorithms, meaning that when you try to implement a cultural model in society, it undergoes a series of stages. To overcome cultural crises, three things must be done: First, reviewing cultural models in the context of the Quran and Sunnah. We need a cultural interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah because it brings the abstract concepts of the Quran into the context of the original culture for reinterpretation. Second, attention should be paid to existing cultural models in Islamic society. Third, discovering and identifying algorithms that can help change the current cultural models in Islamic society.”
Sharaf al-Din: Culture Has Evolved from a “Popular” Level to “Foundational Knowledge”
Dr. Seyed Hossein Sharaf al-Din, in his remarks, stated that since the subject of culture is “humanity,” all the sciences focused on understanding human beings and the innate grounds leading them toward social life, as well as their relationships and interactions with their environment, are codes that find their place in social sciences, and have been discussed in various fields.
He added: From the perspective of some culture researchers, culture can be divided into multiple layers in terms of depth, with each layer shaped by different types of knowledge. Each of these layers, both directly and indirectly, draws from various sources of knowledge, and the concepts embedded in each of these three layers have a nature and essence that corresponds to one or more areas of knowledge, particularly in the fields of humanities and social sciences.
He emphasized: Social sciences have been closely linked to social life and culture for less than a century. In the first few decades of the 20th century, culture and social life were mainly the subjects of study within social sciences. However, from the mid-20th century onward, culture and social sciences began to interact with each other in various ways. It can be said that since this period, culture has become a foundational knowledge and moved beyond the level of popular (common) culture.
He further explained: The first layer, the internal and underlying layer of culture, encompasses grand visions and meanings, often referred to as worldview and value system. In this layer, many ideas related to beliefs, information, values, myths, and emotions are found.
He continued: The underlying layer of culture essentially provides the fundamental logic of social life, shaping the way and style of living in different areas according to this foundational base. This layer contains foundational thoughts such as ontology, anthropology, theology, cosmology, ethics, and other similar matters.
He added: The issues in this philosophical layer are abstract, and the meanings within it are also abstract. Due to its position, this layer is sometimes referred to as the “soul” and “brain” of culture.
Sharaf al-Din stated: The second layer is about being abstract vs material, including norms, recommendations, strategies, models, and guidelines. It is a level closer to reality, with its sources primarily coming from the humanities and social sciences.
He explained: The third layer, the surface and outward layer, contains cultural phenomena that have materialized, expressed, and become visible. This layer is not culture itself but rather the overflow of culture.
He concluded: Culture is a system with ontological depth, made up of accumulated meanings that manifest in collective consciousness and intersubjective realms. Therefore, the domain of the philosophy of culture, as an additional philosophy, can be divided into two broad categories: one concerning specific topics in the field of cultural studies, and the other a broad collection of knowledge and pseudo-knowledge that are reflected in culture in various ways.
Parsania: The Unity of Humans in a Society is a Cognitive Unity
Hojjat Al-Islam Hamid Parsania, speaking at the National Conference on the Philosophy of Culture, held at the Musavian Hall of the Research Institute for Culture and Islamic Thought, stated that the discussion of culture and society is intertwined; culture has an independent identity, distinct from what is in human minds, and extends to the behavioral and cognitive realms of humans.
He added: Allamah Tabatabai, in his Commentary of al-Mizan, elaborates on society with a more detailed approach using the usual method and referencing Quranic verses, where Martyr Muttahari, in his interpretation of this section, makes explicit statements about the importance of culture. In contrast to this view, there is another approach that has not received much argumentative and logical development, which is the idea that culture is a composite of “conventional” reality.
He further explained: In the 1960s, a Quranic session was held at the seminary of Ayatollah Golpaygani, where Ayatollah Jawadi Amoli discussed that society exists and provided reasoning for this assertion.
He continued: The late Allamah Tabatabai, in his foundational discussions, introduced the concept of “conventional realities” from a cognitive perspective and wrote an independent treatise on it. However, Ayatollah Jawadi Amoli approached this issue from an ontological standpoint, stating that the conventional is a form of existence. His statement is rooted in Farabi’s thought, where he divides existence into two types: that which is created by human will and that which exists independently of human will. This framework affirms the existence of society but not of culture.
He said: Adding the notion of “conventional existence” to mean “nonexistent” is a form of confusion between mental existence and conventional existence. Convention is something created by human will, whether in the mental or external realm. However, mental conventions also underpin external conventions.
The member of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution stated: The binary of existence being “true” or “conventional”, is sufficient to prove the existence of society, and with the explanations provided, it can also be sufficient for the realm of culture, showing that culture exists and is a foundational component of society.
He continued: In their intrinsic journey, humans connect to a type of knowledge, which functions as the “soul” of their actions, leading to the creation of those actions. When one, two, or three individuals converge on a shared knowledge, they unite in one shared truth.
He added: The unity of humans in a society is not a physical unity, but a cognitive and spiritual unity. In this sense, this shared knowledge and connection have different levels.
He explained: When Farabi speaks of the “ignorant city,” he is referring to a social reality where society is in a state of corruption or deviation, requiring the articulation of the “ideal city.” In the “corrupt city,” knowledge exists but is veiled and distorted. Therefore, Farabi, during the era of the Minor Occultation, theorizes the existing condition of his own society, elaborating on how society should behave when the Imam is absent.
Parsania concluded: In today’s world, what is absent is reason, which has manifested in rationality, culture, and custom. If the ideal city is to exist, it must overcome the ignorance of the past and take on a new form. This was not Farabi’s issue, as the “ignorant city” in his context was one that concealed the ideal city with its distorted form. His “corrupt city” is a city of misrepresentation, and his “deviant city” is a city of error that has become established.
