World Philosophy Day Gets… Philosophical

Currently, I am studying philosophy and history here at Cornell. Though whenever I introduce myself to someone new who is familiar with my work at The Politicizer, a website I began that amalgamates collegiate political opinion pieces, they almost always assume that I am a politics major. That is not the case, though it is a warranted assumption. Usually my clarification is followed by someone inquiring why I am a philosophy major, and I think the controversy over this years most recent World Philosophy Day in Iran can help explain why:

“World Philosophy Day is a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) initiative that draws people around the world to engage in shared reflection on contemporary issues. Various events and activities include: Philosophical dialogues, debates, lectures, and meetings involving renowned philosophers. International conferences on philosophical topics such as the connection between philosophy, education and culture. Exhibitions and philosophy book fairs, philosophy cafes. Different organizations, community groups and government agencies in many countries, including (but not exclusive to) Chile, France, Morocco, the Philippines, and Turkey, have participated in actively promoting World Philosophy Day.”

As you well know, Iran is a dictatorship ruled by the controversial president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. As in any strong-armed totalitarian regime, the people of Iran, especially many of the intellectuals, live in fear. A Wall Street Journal article pointed out that “[in] the last few years, at least a dozen scholars have been put on trial; many more have been detained without charges. Just last week the trailblazing Iranian blogger Hossein Derakhshan was sentenced to 19½ years in prison for “cooperation with hostile states” and “insulting sanctities,” among other charges.” In other words, for an event that allegedly looks to attain philosophical dialogue, Tehran could not be a poorer choice.

Of course, that was not always the case. Persia was an apex of literature and the arts in the 7th and 8th centuries, while the West was subjected to a “Dark age” after the fall of the Roman Empire. Their location at the convergence of merchants, trade, and ideas in the Middle East was conducive to the discussion that carried their progress in the sciences and humanities for hundreds of years. (Sidenote: Without hesitation, I can say that Persian philosophy of this time is underrated in comparison to western medieval philosophy – Mazdak, Ibn Rushd, Ghazali, etc.) It is a tragedy that, amidst sanctions, a police state, and increasing economic instability, the Iranian people, whose ancestors contributed so much to the sciences, literature, and philosophy, live privy to the whim of a zealot. There is no room for discussion when the reasoning of one man is the only legitimized option. In Iran, inquiry is dissent, and, as such, philosophy is now a form of propaganda.

There brings about an interesting array of answers to the idea of having a day devoted to presenting ideas in a totalitarian state. As you may have inferred, I would never travel to Iran for a philosophy conference at the risk of the state media perverting the reason for my presence. (“Western Philosophers Gather in Iran to Inquire!” Thankfully, I will never have such a qualm.) I feel these things, though, because I believe I have reason to characterize the Iranian government as nefarious and immoral. Thus, any measure I take that can be construed as tolerating their regime is against my interest. Similarly, there is now a competing conference in opposition to the Iranian the location called Philosophy4Freedom. Other philosophers, like Eric Thomas Weber, a professor at the University of Mississippi, believe that “If you want to fight injustice, you have to speak truth to power. That is impossible if you refuse to speak to power.”… “Ignoring and disengaging injustice only strengthens its hold.” Depending on one’s view of the legitimacy of the Iranian government, it could be justified under certain facets of moral relativism that it’s fine to allow the Iranian people to act as they please as long as it is in accordance with their local moral code. Others, yet, might feel so strongly that they violently oppose the Iranian government on certain grounds. What I find compelling, though is that this dramatic array of reactions to the Iranian government illustrate exactly why I became a philosophy major. Frankly, ideas matter.

This article first appeared on The Politicizer, http://thepoliticizer.com/.