Orientalism and prejudice between the fairness

Abstract

Objectivity is the most important feature that must be possessed by whoever deals with scientific research, regardless of its type or topic, so how is the situation when the matter is related to a sensitive and dangerous topic such as (Orientalism) that may push the researcher to his feelings away from the truth? So, the issue is not easy.. It needs deliberation and issuance of judgments subject to a lot of deliberation. From here, we found that it is the right of the study to recognize the rights, so it gives the good deeds to the other, and calculates what he owes, reminding him of every intentional error or the result of contrived prejudice. Talking about the objectivity of Orientalism (1) is not an easy matter, because of the suspicion and suspicion that this word arouses in us when we hear it, and it is a justified suspicion in some of those extremist Orientalists who are motivated by religion or race. However, the objectivity of the research leads us to monitor those platforms from which the voices of some Western moderates emanated, who directed their thoughts to study the East and the study of the Arab and Islamic heritage, a study that reveals to them some facts hidden from them, and I mean by them those who devoted themselves to studying the East for purely scientific goals, with no intention of anything but research. And roasting without another goal, and perhaps the conscious reading of what the Orientalists produced and what they created in their various fields proves that the number of these Orientalists with scientific goals is very few, and they, despite their sincerity in research and study, are not free from errors and inaccurate conclusions. And they differ from others who build the poem In the distortion, since the mistakes of the first group with scientific goals were the result of their ignorance of the methods of the Arabic language or their ignorance of the historical Islamic methods as they are, so they imagined them as they imagine their societies, ignoring the natural, psychological and temporal differences that differentiate between the historical atmosphere that they study and the present atmosphere in which they live (2) and Edward Said An opinion on that objectivity that he presents through his attack on academic cultural orientalism (3) and his denunciation of it because he believes that any objectivity in the other approach must be tainted by something of shortening and distortion, which is what he called d. Mustafa al-Sibai’s other inaccurate perception due to the types of differences – natural, psychological, temporal, and the nature of the historical atmosphere – which prompted Ad Ward to denounce it because he saw “that he classified, tabulated, tabulated, codified, indexed, planned, dissected and reduced it, as if these processes without which no systematic thinking or serious interpretation is correct No matter how evil beginners they are in themselves and not suitable at all for obtaining any true understanding of human societies, their culture, languages, etc., because the aforementioned mental processes must distort the reality of these societies and falsify their conditions.However, Edward acknowledges and affirms, on the other hand, that it is impossible for any eastern society. Or is it for a Westerner to understand something important about another society that is alien to him... without resorting to classification, classification, planning, blogging... etc., with the distortion, distortion and abbreviation that accompanies all these processes?