Küçükural, Önder
Yükleniyor...
Araştırma projeleri
Organizasyon Birimleri
Medeniyetler İttifakı Enstitüsü, Medeniyet Araştırmaları Ana Bilim Dalı
Enstitü, “Medeniyet Araştırmaları” alanını haddizatında müstakil bir araştırma sahası olarak ihdas etmeyi hedeflemektedir. Bu çerçevede Medeniyet Araştırmaları alanının kendi çözümleme düzlemlerini tarif etmek ve alanı yönlendirecek ontolojik, epistemolojik ve metodolojik yaklaşımları teklif etmek için çalışmaktadır. Medeniyet Araştırmaları, mevcut disiplinlerin yaklaşımlarının çözümlemekte yetersiz kaldığı, yerel veya dünya ölçeğinde, insanlığın karşılaştığı farklı meseleleri anlamaya yönelik, çok disiplinli ve alternatif bakışlara imkan veren bir yaklaşım sunmayı amaçlamaktadır.
Adı Soyadı
Önder Küçükural
İlgi Alanları
Akıl Yürütme, Münazara, Din Sosyolojisi, Kamusal Alan, İklim Değişikliği
Kurumdaki Durumu
Aktif Personel
3 sonuçlar
Arama Sonuçları
Listeleniyor 1 - 3 / 3
Yayın Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: Argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate(Routledge, 2021) Küçükural, Önder; Küçükural, Önder; Üzelgün, Mehmet Ali; Fernandes-Jesus, Maria; Küçükural, Önder; Medeniyetler İttifakı Enstitüsü, Medeniyet Araştırmaları Ana Bilim Dalı; Medeniyetler İttifakı Enstitüsü, Medeniyet Araştırmaları Ana Bilim DalıHow do adherents to hegemonic discourses construe and respond to radical arguments by activists? To address the question, we examined how adherents to hegemonic climate change discourses react to a climate activist’s arguments. In interviews conducted with corporate actors of low-carbon transitions, we used a video excerpt to elicit critical reactions to an activist’s argumentation on carbon offsetting. We used the critical reactions as an index of interviewees’ reception of the activist’s case and pragma-dialectical theory to analyze them. We found that interviewees advanced four types of criticism concerning individual agency, awareness-raising, neutralization, and financial instruments. We discuss their inter-relations and how interviewees construed the activist’s argumentation in ways that evaded his more antagonistic claims.Yayın The virtuous arguer as a virtuous sequencer(Springer Science and Business Media B.V., 2023) Oruç, Rahmi; Sadek, Karim; Küçükural, Önder; Oruç, Rahmi; Küçükural, Önder; İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Fakültesi, Karşılaştırmalı Edebiyat BölümüIn this paper we draw on the munazara tradition to intervene in the debate on whether argument assessment should be agent- or act-based. We introduce and deploy the notion of sequencing - the ordering of the antagonist's critical moves - to make explicit an ambiguity between the agent and the act of arguing. We show that sequencing is a component of argumentation that inextricably involves the procedure as well as the agent and, therefore, its assessment cannot be adequately undertaken if either agent- or act-based norms are ignored or demoted. We present our intervention through a challenge that virtue argumentation needs to address for it to be considered an alternative to existing theories of argument assessment (Section 2). We then briefly introduce munazara and focus on its notion of sequencing to explicate the interdependence between the agent and the procedure (Section 3). Next, we address the challenge by offering an account of the virtuous arguer as a virtuous sequencer (Section 4). In conclusion, we reflect on the implications of sequencing on virtue argumentation and the norms of argumentation.Yayın Reinterpreting the tension between dīn and dunyā: The Naqshbandī Ṭarīqah as experienced and shaped by its Mujaddidī and Khālidī Shaykhs(İstanbul Üniversitesi, 2022) Küçükural, Önder; Küçükural, Önder; Noorata, Metin; Küçükural, ÖnderIn his article “Did Premodern Muslims Distinguish the Religious and Secular?,” Rushain Abbasi convincingly demonstrates how pre-modern Muslim thinkers had made an array of meaningful distinctions between dīn (‘religion’) and dunyā (‘the world’) approximating the religious-secular dyad. This paper explores a fourth typology, a latent opposing attitude toward the dīn-dunyā binary, by expanding Abbasi’s analytical trajectory to include both a discursive and pragmatic framework – the former involving scrutiny of the content and substance of rationally thought-out arguments, the latter demanding a closer look at how ideas have informed and shaped practical forms of reasoning and their application in the real world. Therefore, beyond the conceptual and epistemological signification of the dīn-dunyā binary in Islamic thought as surveyed by Abbasi, an attempt will be made to show how Muslims have also reasoned in both theoretical and practical terms to bridge the tension between the two spheres. The overarching objective is to consider how the dīn-dunyā binary fares in the Islamic mystical tradition through a case study analysis of five prominent Naqshbandī shaykhs: Aḥmad Sirhindī, Khālid al-Shahrazūrī, Aḥmad Gümüşhānevī, Zahid Kotku, and Mahmud Esad Coşan. The dialectical method developed by Shmuel Eisenstadt, which supposes a basic tension between the transcendental and mundane orders, will be applied to examine how each individual shaykh experienced, interpreted, and bridged the opposition between dīn and dunyā in both their doctrinal teachings and life-practices. The study aims to show how the shaykhs applied certain ethico-mystical principles like khalwat dar anjuman (‘solitude within society’) in a way that saw them engaging in a constant and concerted effort at bridging the unbridgeable in their worldly and other-worldly pursuits.
