The Perils of Not Thinking
Abeer Mishkhas, abeermishkhas@arabnews.comNewspapers recently carried the story of a famous religious scholar — a sheikh — who gave a lecture in a mosque. During the lecture, he was interrupted by a group of young men who shouted at him and expressed their contemptuous rejection of his opinion. Though in a mosque, one of the young men angrily waved a small knife at the sheikh who was forced to stop his lecture. He was then escorted by security from the mosque in order to avoid a worsening of the situation. The reason for the young men’s inexcusable reaction was, as far as most people are concerned, inconsequential. The sheikh was speaking about his belief that drums are not forbidden. To say such a thing to people who have always been told — and have always been taught — that music is completely haram (not allowed) was a genuine shock.
Abeer Mishkhas has been doing a good job in chronically Saudi society. Today she take on two topics, how Saudi Arabia has become a country of closed minds, and how complaining about problems is always easier than solving them.
She takes to task those that seek unitary views of the world in all its aspects, warning of the danger that it both has produced and continues to produce. Citing an article by another journalist, writing in Arabic for another paper, she notes how the closed mind–another example of laziness–has become the norm and why it must change.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
June:28:2005 - 15:34
From the article:
“If the young men in the mosque were violent, it is because of their lack of self-assurance plus their own certainty about their beliefs. This has been the cornerstone of their education from the first day of it and it seems they have learned the lesson very well indeed. They have never had an opinion of their own — they have always been told what opinion to hold — and to propose something new means that they have to think and analyze. And this is a skill they do not possess since, not needing it, they have never been taught it.”
Mr. Burgess, could you expand on this, please? I do not get the connection here.
June:28:2005 - 16:52
I think the writing is combining two ideas that have the same deleterious effect.
First, Arab culture deeply honors the elders of a family. The word from an elder is simply not questioned and certainly not argued. If Dad says, “do this,” you simply do it. Unless Grand-Dad says otherwise. Deference to those in senior positions tends to be near absolute.
Second, the Saudi educational system is truly backward in its methodology. In a class, the student listens to the teacher and memorizes. There’s no role for intellectual curiosity, for critical thinking. What one is told is, simply, true.
Put them together and you get young people who are great at following orders, but not at all in seeing whether those orders make sense, whether there might be better alternatives, whether there might not be better ways to reach an end.
June:28:2005 - 17:04
I mean the psychology in this statement is what doesn’t click with me: If the young men in the mosque were violent, it is because of their lack of self-assurance plus their own certainty about their beliefs.
Why would the “lack of self-assurance” plus “certainty” lead to violence?
June:28:2005 - 20:36
The “lack of self-assurance” means that they’re not mature enough to make up their own minds about things.
The “certainty” comes from their unquestioning willingness to assume what they were told is correct. Equally a sign of intellectual immaturity.
Put them together and you get young people who will believe what they are told and who will go into action if they are told to do so. They lack the intellectual skills to do otherwise.