Ethnography and Normative Debates

• In Event: Ethnography and Political Theory

Abstract

An emerging body of scholarship has argued for adding ethnography to the repertoire of methods utilized by political theorists. This is a welcome move, and here I explore the contribution that ethnography could make to understand normative debates within a tradition, as well as differences between traditions of thought and practice.

Contemporary Islamic political thought poses a particular challenge for political theorists and historians of political thought. Research on Islamic political thought has focused—often with great attention to detail and nuance—on texts and particularly medieval ones (Watt, 1987(1968); Crone, 2004; Cook 2001; Khaduri, 1984). This dependence on textual sources translates into a unique level of distance from contemporary life as many scholars have little experience by way of a lived immersion in the Islamic tradition. Paradoxically, the fact that the Islamic tradition is relatively unique in the vibrancy of a meritocratic class of knowledge producers and consumers in the form of the ulama (sing. alim) or scholars, who continue to engage with writings and ideas from the earliest periods of Islam, has led some to underestimate the changes in the modern period (e.g. Lewis, 1988).

A growing body of scholarship is beginning to engage with modern Islamic thought (Rahman, 1982; Enayat, 1982; Euben, 1999; Devji, 2005; Browers, 2006; Dabashi, 2008; Zaman, 2012; March, 2013) and has brought significant depth to this area. Much of this work, however, still relies heavily on text-based analysis, focusing generally, but not exclusively, on the writings and words of canonical and influential thinkers. Many comparative political theorists argue for the use of ethnographic immersion to supplement text-based analysis. I go further, by examining the use ethnography as a primary source for political theory, rather than just a supplement.

Author

• Humeira Iqtidar, King's College London