Almost every society eventually creates an “other”that serves as such for certain political, economic, or social purposes. And in most cases, the identification of this “other” rests on a simplistic “us versus them” dichotomy: we are “good” people, and they are “bad” people. Because this simple dichotomy is more mythical than real, the maintenance of this myth requires a continuous pumping of misinformation into the public realm. Misinformation is not necessarily incorrect information; it is also purposeful manipulation of reality. Each society foregrounds the good acts of its own people and backgrounds their bad acts while foregrounding the bad acts of “others” and backgrounding their good acts. Thus, we all accomplish giving our own communities a delusional sense of moral and cultural superiority over others, which eventually turns the material conflicts between us and others into moral conflicts between good and evil.

The common “good Westerners-bad Muslims” dichotomy results in manipulation of the information provided to the people in the West about both Muslims and Westerners themselves. This is why in some of the Western media, evil acts of Muslim people are almost always associated with Islam while noble acts of Muslim people such as Mr. Osman are either ignored or associated with their nationality rather than their religion. In the same vein, evil acts of Western people such as those who gassed the nursery of a Muslim mosque in Ohio while about 300 people were praying inside in September 2008 are largely ignored by some of the mainstream Western media, for it goes against the “good Westerners” image.

A striking example that is used as evidence to the evilness of Muslims is the degree of support for terrorism among Muslims. Authors from Sam Harris to Robert Spencer have sought refuge in Muslim support for terrorism when they wanted to denounce Islam. Some surveys reveal that there are some Muslims who justify killing innocent people in certain circumstances. According to the respectable PEW institution’s surveys, 10 to 50 percent of people in different Muslim societies (with an average of 20-25%) often times or sometimes justify suicide bombing of civilian targets to defend Islam. Such findings are construed as evidence to both the belligerent nature of the religion of Islam and the evilness of the Muslim mind. Yet another truth that goes uncovered in some of the Western media is the fact that there is comparable support for terrorism among Western people as well. According to a 2007 survey by World Public Opinion, for example, 24% of Americans find “bombing and other types of attacks intentionally aimed at civilians” often times or sometimes justified. But such surveys never find a place in the some of the mainstream American media because they go against the common “good American-bad Muslim” dichotomy.

The problem of misinformation is not unique to the West. It is equally problematic in Muslim societies. Most Muslims have known the United States and Americans through the lenses of Vietnam, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and the like. But few of them are aware of such programs like Peace Corps or Volunteers for Prosperity because such good American acts go against the mythical “bad Americans-good Muslims” dichotomy in the Muslim world. Similarly, most Muslims have memorized many non-Muslim names for their brutal acts against Muslims, but very few Muslims are familiar with Muslim names who are held responsible for the crimes against humanity. Whereas the former figures confirm the mythical “good Muslims-bad non-Muslims” image, the latter contradicts it. Therefore, the former examples have been highlighted in the Muslim media and the latter has been ignored.

On the forefront of this universal misinformation campaign are two institutions: the media and governments. The media loves sensational, flashy news because such news pumps up their ratings. Consequently, the media capitalize on overstated evilness of some other people and the existential threat they pose to “our” society. In the same vein, our governments love the existence of “external threats to our national security,” mythical or real, because it allows them to divert public attention from failed domestic policies to international politics and also to implement certain political and military agenda that they could not have carried out without a foreign threat. John Mueller, a professor of political science from Ohio State University, estimated that “the lifetime chance of an American being killed by international terrorism is about one in 80,000-about the same chance of being killed by a comet or a meteor.” Yet whereas no sane American is obsessed with the adversity of a meteor falling on his/her head, many have been made to obsessively think, fear, and guard themselves against a terrorist attack by some evil others.

Most of us have been misinformed about other societies to some extent. We are all, therefore, in need of a therapy of knowledge refinement. But how do we do that? Personally, I think there are two effective ways/channels of refining our knowledge and acquiring authentic information about other societies. First, we need to diversify our sources of information by reading multiple and multi-national news papers or portals. Second, we need to diversify our pool of friends and include in it as many people from “other” societies as possible. Nothing is more powerful than a concrete counter-example when it comes to destroying a myth. As we diversify our sources of information and befriend people from other societies, we will realize that “we” are not as “good” as we are told we are, and “they” are not as “bad” as we are told they are, which will hopefully help us re-appreciate the essential commonality between all of us: humanity. Hopefully, we will then also realize that the major struggle is not between “good” us versus “bad” them but rather between the good people and the bad ones among us all. We need to find ways of testing or confirming knowledge we get from the media and not forget that the media is owned and operated by people, who, like us, have many presumptions, biases, priorities, or simply misconceptions, that can spill over when they are “reporting.”

Kaan Kerem has a PhD in political science. He is a freelance writer on philosophy and scientific thought.

First, we should emphasize that Prof. Zewail’s statements resonate very well with what famous scholar Ibn-al Haytham said 10 centuries ago:

“The seeker after truth is not one who studies the writings of the ancients and, following his natural disposition, puts his trust in them, but rather the one who suspects his faith in them and questions what he gathers from them, the one who submits to argument and demonstration, and not the sayings of a human being whose nature is fraught with all kinds of imperfection and deficiency. Thus the job of the man who investigates the writings of scientists, if learning the truth is his goal, is to make himself an enemy of all that he reads, and applying his mind to the core and margins of its content, attack it from every side. He should also suspect himself as he performs his critical examination of it, so that he may avoid falling into either prejudice or leniency.”

Every human being is given the ability to think. That is what makes all the progress of humanity possible. When we think we process the information we receive based on what we already know and we usually make judgments. Nobody can deny that all humans go through this process many times every day. But we can question the outcome of our thinking process, that is, our judgments. Many times, we can be wrong in our judgments, and this is where “critical” thinking might help.

Today, most people learn how to think systematically at schools, particularly during university education. In fact, according to Derek Bok, the former president of Harvard University, faculty members in the US almost unanimously agree that “teaching critical thinking” is the principal aim for undergraduate education. Although many have great conviction that critical thinking is very important, there is no universal definition for it. The American Philosophical Association gives the following definition:

“Purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation and inference as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual and methodological considerations on which a judgment is based.”

Based on this definition and what we quoted from Ibn-al Haytham, we can identify the following points about critical thinking:

1) When you read or hear a statement, do not accept it without question.

2) Try to find other information that can support or disprove the statement, try to come up with ways to demonstrate validity or falsehood of the statement, and test the statement.

3) As you perform your critical examination, be aware of your own deficiencies as a human. Consider your own biases, numerous possibilities of making mistakes in your judgments, or prejudices you can assume without knowing.

4) Be aware of the method you use for evaluating a claim, and think about both its strengths and weaknesses.

Critical thinking, if we develop the habit of performing it, can help us every day. Consider how you receive information in the twenty-first century. Typically, you read a newspaper or watch news on TV. If you just accept what you hear and see, then you can sometimes be manipulated or fooled. In an ideal world we can assume that objective presentation of news is possible. In the real world, however, those who transfer news bits to the population are also humans who are prone to similar biases. Many times a newspaper or a TV station represents certain values, ideologies, or supports some political positions. Besides, news reporting is so much commercialized that news editors and reporters also think about how to attract readers, and might use catchy words deliberately. Therefore, everyone should ask questions, clarify certain interpretations, and need to fight their own biases before reaching conclusions whenever they encounter a media report. An increased number of critical thinkers will help create a healthy debate about controversial issues.

We can expand this critical approach with respect to news media to our formal education experiences. At schools, our teachers deliver new information every day. We also read our textbooks. Typical student tendency might be to just accept what they hear and what they read, though this may depend on the student’s intellectual development and the culture of the society. If we perform critical thinking in the classroom and while reading textbooks, we can grow intellectually much more than otherwise. We can retain what we learn more easily. In addition, the purpose of schools and universities is to prepare us for life. We all know that in real life problems are never well defined, and most of the time you cannot readily find an authoritative figure or a manual to consult. Therefore, it is imperative that we teach students to question what they hear and what they read. In order to encourage students to perform more critical thinking in the classroom, however, we might need to find alternative modes of teaching and move away from conventional method of active teacher – passive students.

Although we must strive to teach critical thinking, we should also recognize the fact that there are roughly three distinct phases in our lives with respect to thinking, and not everyone is in the same phase at a given time. When we are young we usually think that every question has a certain answer, and it is just a matter of finding the authority who can give that answer. As we grow up, however, we realize that sometimes many authoritative figures may disagree. This observation may make one a relativist; that is, we might start thinking that depending on who you ask the answer varies, and it is all relative. As we further grow in our intellectual development, we usually notice that although people disagree on certain topics, we should always make some decisions, and some points of view have more support than others. By performing critical thinking we can filter out less reliable information, and come to better conclusions. In some complex cases, however, we might realize that there is no single correct judgment, and circumstances might lead us down different paths.

In the context of these three different phases, we can safely claim that on the average you expect the ability to think critically improve, as we get older. Elementary school children are most likely to think that there is a correct answer to every question. In middle and high school, many students will realize that there may be different answers to the same question depending on whom you ask. By the time of their graduation we expect university students to learn how to critically evaluate information. This final outcome, though very significant for a healthy society, highly depends on our teaching strategies. That is, if rote memorization is more valued than critical evaluation, then university graduates might stay as naive relativists or even worse.

Critical thinking is extremely crucial to separate the truth from myth. A well known example is about our brains. In many societies, it is said that people typically use about 10% of their brain, and geniuses like Einstein are able to use more of their brains. Some questions to ask are as follows:

1) What does it mean to use 10% of the brain?

2) Who provides this information? Is s/he a neuroscientist?

3) How do people measure brain usage?

4) Einstein lived long time ago. Did they measure his brain activity the same way as the control group to conclude that he used more of his brain?

When we search for answers to these questions, we typically find that there is no basis for this claim. It does not mean much. Maybe the statement originally meant that many do not use their brain’s full potential, which might be true. But, when the statement is compared to what we know about brain science, then it becomes a myth.

While everyone and every profession benefits from critical thinking, some jobs require critical thinking more than others. Scientists, for example, have an obligation to be extremely critical of others’ work. Let us remember that Ahmad Zewail and Ibn-al Haytham are both scientists. In science, there is a process called “peer review,” which is extremely useful. Any research carried out becomes scientific knowledge after it is submitted to the critical reviews of other scientists in the field. Any contribution submitted to a scientific journal is tested for correctness and originality. At the end of the critical review, the reviewers submit a report to the editors of the journal, who then make a decision. Many times the authors of the article are asked questions or are asked to make modifications, to which they may respond. In short, we can safely state that a scientist must be a critical thinker, or otherwise s/he cannot perform his or her research duties, and s/he is prone to become a repeater of someone else’s ideas, and may go awry at times.

From what we explained so far, it is probably obvious that we need some background knowledge about a subject in order to become a real critical thinker. It is clear that if someone knows nothing about urban planning, for example, it is very hard for him to critically examine any work on urban planning. This straightforward observation suggests that most people cannot be critical thinkers even if they want to be. Fortunately, this conclusion is only partially true because critical thinking is not a single discrete outcome but rather a continuum. Although knowledge of a topic makes us better thinkers in a field, there are always some minimal questions one can ask. For example, there is a controversial topic and someone makes some crucial statements about it. Even if you don’t know about the topic, you can ask whether the speaker is an expert on the topic or not. Or you can ask about what kind of evidence he is using. Does the evidence presented come from a reliable source? Why may this person take this side of the argument, but not other alternatives? Are there any other alternative approaches to the same issue? That is, at minimum, the answers to these questions can help us develop sound judgment.

A great case in which many feel lost is the global warming debate. By doing a simple web search on global warming you can find articles both supporting and denying human-caused global warming. But which point of view should you believe? Although there is consensus that global warming is happening, there is disagreement about whether it is caused by our technological conveniences, or whether it is just a result of natural temperature fluctuations in geological time scales (hundreds of thousands of years).

Indeed, the question “which point of view should you believe?” may not be the correct question. Instead, perhaps we should ask why people feverishly debate about this issue. Why do people care a lot about various aspects of global warming and atmospheric science research? A little investigation shows that there is a lot at stake. Accepting that excessive use of energy by humans, which leads to increase in carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, causes global warming has many economic, political, and social consequences. If you agree that man-made global warming can trigger many other events which can eventually make the climate on the Earth fall off-balance, then it follows that many people in the world must change their lifestyles, and this may also mean that some big companies must make changes which may hurt their profits, or that some governments might not use certain political leverage in international relations.

Obviously, it will not be easy to accept such findings, even if they come from some prominent scientists. There are, in fact, scientists on both sides of the aisle. This is because atmospheric science is extremely complex, and even with our best computers modeling the changes in the atmosphere it remains a very hard task. Further investigation also shows that there are different types of evidence people use. Some point to reports prepared with sponsorship from some governments or companies. Some expand on disagreements among scientists, and conclude that no action is needed until all the claims are proven. As we mention above, there are also scientific articles published in “peer-reviewed” journals. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) puts out consensus statements. In short, it is a complex issue, and the credibility of evidence varies. We leave further investigation on climate change to practice critical thinking to the interested reader.

Critical thinking requires effort, sometimes a lot of effort. Lazy personalities and those who do not like to engage their mental abilities are less likely to perform critical thinking. In this regard, critical thinking is also very different from rote criticism. Rote criticism does not require much effort; typically the statements of the person performing the critique do not have a sound basis. While critical thinking is necessary for a healthy society to clarify especially certain controversial topics, mere criticism of one another can be a means to create unnecessary enmity among individuals.

Critical thinking does not mean that we need to become a skeptic and reject everything. In fact, descriptions of critical thinking involve paying special attention to certain criteria and standards. In practice, if one does not have any reference it becomes very hard to move forward in thought. What needs to be emphasized is that the world is not black and white. It displays a vast variety of colors. We can give more weight to certain colors than to others. What we cannot claim is that there is a single color, and all others are false. We can certainly have certain beliefs, paradigms, and values. These may become the basis for some of the criteria and standards against which we evaluate new information. At times, great events and findings might force us to evaluate certain paradigms we take for granted, too. However, such sharp turns do not happen frequently in the life of an individual or society.

In conclusion, critical thinking skills are essential for everybody. We should be aware of our own shortcomings, biases, prejudgments, as well as the sources, agendas, worldviews, paradigms and the information channels we use when we process new information. Critical thinking cannot be done instantly; it requires effort and courage to come face-to-face with one’s own errors. Teaching critical thinking is not instant, either. Formal and informal education institutions must strive to develop critical thinking skills in students, and such an endeavor might require modification of our approach to teaching. In the final evaluation, it is extremely crucial that we take the necessary steps to increase the number of critical thinkers in the world for the benefit of all humankind.

Dr. Ertan Salik is an Assistant Prof. of Physics at California State Polytechnic Univ, Pomona. As well as teaching and conducting physics research Dr. Salik is currently involved in many education programs.

Notes

1. The Fountain magazine, interview with Ahmad Zewail by Nuh Gedik, Jan-Feb 2009, issue 67.
2. Steffens, Bradley. Ibn-al Haytham: First Scientist, Morgan Reynolds Publishing. Also see Book Review in The Fountain Magazine, issue 63, May-June 2008.
3. Bok, Derek. Our Underachieving Colleges, Princeton Univ Press, 2006.
4. Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction, American Philosophical Association Report, 1990.
5. IPCC consensus statements can be downloaded from http://www.ipcc.ch/.

In this issue the article on “The Adaptation in the Senses” points to the fact that the human body is blessed with an ability to adapt to the surrounding conditions by way of which our senses get used to changing climate, light, and even pain. This feature of our body is a mercy, considering that if we could not adapt to circumstances, life would be torture. Could this be the reason bombings and civilian sufferings in Iraq do not irritate me-because I have been watching or reading about it for more than five years now and my senses are adapted to being exposed to the same play on the Iraqi stage?

While voicing a strong longing for the lofty and colorful life of centuries ago, the lead article is a consolation for the victims of all times as it reminds the reader of how joyous enthusiasm was once achieved: “We believed as long as we could employ our willpower up to its potential all problems could be overcome as a result of divine help. We always managed to discover contentment in our soul and proceeded on our course.” In such a state of psychology no misfortune can shake any individual or community.

In this issue you will meet Ottoman Women: Myth and Reality, a book which won the Benjamin Franklin best book in history award in May 2008. Its description of the legal rights and social status of Muslim women in the nineteenth century will shatter life-long prejudices about harem life. Another writer, Dr Salik, takes us on a space journey to discover planets orbiting other stars where scientists hope to test theories developed on planet creation. Thomas C. Smedley offers an interesting pattern of engaging with foreign cultures as a result of his personal experiences with the Turkish community in the USA. Smedley says that by practicing role reversal, a person of good will can overcome the barriers of language, religion, and nationality.

Ramadan mubarak! We wish this holy month of Islam may be a means of peace and joy for all peoples of the world.

Interfaith dialogue activities all around the world continue at a fast pace, and more such meetings are being held all the time. Not a single day goes by without the blessing of the hope-inspiring news of peace-promotion events in some city or country, thanks to countless people of faith who look for common values and purposes under God’s will. They would like to cooperate against war, terror, poverty, and all kinds of discrimination in order to unite forces to glorify God’s Name and uphold human values and rights, peace, education, and the family structure. Prophet Abraham plays a key role in these interfaith dialogue activities, for he is considered the patriarch of all divinely revealed religions. “Paragon of Unity: Discovering the Essence of the Abrahamic Messages” explores his example through many of his outstanding virtues, like investigating faith, the willingness to worship the Divine alone, regard for nature, faithfulness to promises, hospitality, compassion, and devotion to One God. This article strives to promote peace according to the words of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him: “Those who believe in one God are but brothers and sisters.”

At times, one really feels like “that’s it, we have come to the end; we have failed”; . . . when one feels totally exhausted, without any energy to convey messages of human virtue, lofty values, compassion, and tolerance. September 2004 has left so many of us speechless in the face of the horror we have seen on the news about the seizure of a school and taking students as hostages in southern Russia (North Ossetia), and its violent ending. More than 300 people were killed including children, teachers, parents, and other innocent people. Despite certain names and photos being announced on TV screens and newspaper headlines, nobody knows for sure who is behind such atrocities. No religion should be held accountable for them, as no divinely revealed belief system promotes murdering innocents or causing any kind of harm to them. Terror has no place for faith, and thus a true believer cannot be a terrorist. Praying for the souls of the innocent casualties of all terrorist attacks, we invite all people to engage in sound thinking, thereby saving ourselves from the shock of any violence, and to concentrate our efforts on mutual understanding.

The tradition of our scientific and technological explosion continues in the new millennium as an inheritance from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The need to publicize scientific developments has caused Web publishers to prepare a site to announce daily science news. It is updated three times a day. The following scientific disciplines are covered:

•Health & Medicine, Cells & Microbes, Mind & Brain, Plants & Animals are located in the Life Sciences section.

•Space & Time, Matter & Energy, Earth & Climate, Computers & Math are subdepartments of the Physical Sciences section.

•Engineering & Tech, Fossils & Ruins, Fun & Learning, and Trends & Issues are subdepartments of the Science & Society section.

•The “picture of the day” is published in the Image Gallery section. Images are being archieved in this section and categorized according to topic. Top-rated images also are listed here.

•Newsgroups on scientific subjects are located in the Discussion section. Topics for the “talk of the day” for the news-groups and the message archive can be found, too.

Hubble thing

http://oposite.stsci.edu is the Web address of the Space Telescope Science Institute (STSCI), a site operated for NASA. The Latest News from Hubble and Hubble Pictures are published by this page.

•All pictures since 1990 are being archived in the Gallery section. The Gallery of Planetary Nebulae contains more than 100 pictures.

•The Education section contains subdepartments of Education at Hubble and Origins: Searching for Our Cosmic Roots.

•The Sci-Tech section covers The Story of the Hubble Space Telescope and features a tour of the STSCI facility.

Family and Health

The virtual version of the American Academy of Family Physicians is located at www.aafp.org. Its main topics are family health and nutrition. Visitors are asked a daily question.

• The Family Practice section contains definitions, statistics, and government and advocacy information.

• The Clinical Information section features information on family health policies and research. CME (Continuing Medical Education) and lists courses, calendars, and on-line credit departments. This latter information is especially helpful for students who want to continue their medical education.

Journals, directories, and newsletters about family health are located in the Publications section.

AAFP also publishes www.familydoctor.org. 

Cultural diversity has two vital benefits. First, individuals from different groups and cultures get to know each other, which engenders respect and consideration for each one’s beliefs, values, and ways of life. Achieving such a goal is a must for countries like America, which hosts many different cultures and groups. Such an understanding is becoming crucial for all nations, even for quite homogenous ones, as all are quickly becoming dwellers of the same global village. Humanity needs examples of successful multicultural societies. The second benefit is the exchange of knowledge and experience. This article elaborates on the second benefit.

Today, in many American-made movies and television serials (such as Kung Fu), we see a wise Asian man who is always calm, never panics, and brings such unique, humanitarian solutions to problems that the Americans on the scene are amazed. Although these are not real stories, they give the flavor of possible benefits to be derived from exploring different perspectives and philosophies.

The fact that all individuals living in the vast variety of societies found on our planet are human beings is often overlooked by individuals, communities, and even social science professionals, depending on the rate of their self-containedness. All individuals living in different societies are, without doubt, human beings; the differences separating them are merely external elements. Thus everyone, regardless of his or her society, experiences common problems; only the context changes. For example, a beggar and a king both feel anger at times. The beggar’s anger may lead him to hit his wife, whereas the king’s anger may cause him to engulf the nation in war. Another analogy is that of a pickpocket to a computer hacker illegally transferring funds.

Throughout history, human cultures and groups have dealt with the same characteristics and problems as we, the people welcoming a new millennium, are dealing with now. As contemporary cultures reflect inherited perspectives and philosophies, centuries-old cultures and civilizations may be invaluable resources for finding new points of view and approaches to our problems.

The emphasis placed on such a cultural exchange by both American individuals and institutions at all levels is not as great as that which has been placed on other, but less important, issues. For example, a typical American secondary school student’s knowledge of world geography and foreign languages has long been inferior to that of his or her European counterpart. This indicates a lack of interest toward the rest of the world.

The same indifference can be observed in American nightly news programs, even on national television channels. For example, the “World Report” news programs usually give domestic news (unless there is a war going on in which America is heavily involved). Might such an ethnocentric view of the world stemming from being the sole superpower be responsible for this attitude?

Sometimes people living in a system, even a well-functioning system, cannot solve their social and individual problems because they cannot raise themselves above the flow of events. The most frequently used tool to solve any problem is power, especially if it is abundant and readily available. Power often is seen as the best shortcut to the solution due to the deceiving ease of its exertion, which also allows its user to ignore or to not consider its potentially serious side effects.

The power applied may be physical, economic, military, or technological, depending on the nature of the problem. However, its exercise is not always the key to the solution. A mighty lion caught in a hunter’s net should have the modesty to request help from a tiny mouse, for the latter’s sharp teeth may work where the lion’s devastating paws cannot. One should have the wisdom to know a gallon of gas cannot attract that which can be attracted by a teaspoonful of honey.

A simple but enlightening example of how different perspectives can help to solve problems is given below. During the heated negotiations between two political parties for a coalition in Turkey, a simple but totally satisfactory suggestion by a Turkish newspaper columnist attracted my attention. The two parties, having an almost equal number of representatives in Parliament, could not share the ministries, for ministries have varying degrees of political weight. The columnist’s suggestion was not inspired by a similar case from a contemporary democracy, but from a parable describing King Solomon’s approach to a similar problem: Two heirs could not agree on how to divide their inheritance equally, because they could not agree on the value of the items to be inherited. King Solomon suggested that one heir divide the inheritance into two equal halves, after which the other heir would have the first choice. Thus, an ancient parable offered a practical solution to a conflict in a contemporary democracy. Whether his suggestion was considered or not is beyond our concern here.

One can find books of ancient and contemporary philosophers and different cultures in bookstores, but who reads them? The general public, especially the youth, should be made aware of these resources and directed to make use of humanity’s historical experience. For example, various herbs used in some parts of the world for centuries to treat specific illnesses are now preferred over drugs developed in laboratories, for they are all-natural, non-addictive, and have no side effects. Obviously, cultures and civilizations have much more to offer each other than herbs. I wish that Americans would look sincerely for the wisdom that different civilizations and cultures have to offer.

Note: Since this article is intended to reflect a broad perspective, I gave no specifics about the methodology to realize the goals indicated and no thorough examples. Such examples in different fields, along with their methodologies, can serve as the content of separate articles.

Wartime coverage

For big institutions that need to deal with the media, buying advertisements through media outlets is a common way to avoid being attacked by the media and sponsoring programs is a good device for using the media as PR agents. After some bad experiences with the media in the Korean War and worse experiences in the Vietnam War, the US military determined to harness the power of the media. Like any other service-providers keen to establish and maintain the popularity of their products, the military sought to advertise their services: patriotism, heroism, military might and, of course, war. During the Gulf War they played the role of an advertising client of the media, especially the broadcast media, and, in effect, sponsored a live war spectacle in the Persian Gulf. Thousands of soldiers and innocent civilians made up the cast for a show which attracted millions to their TV screens. It was a masterpiece of collaboration between the army and the media.

In order to sustain government and national policies, especially in ‘democratic’ countries, public support is vital, and today the media monopolize this power of persuasion. We can see power centres attempting to control media as early as the 1400s. When Gutenberg invented the printing press, the Roman Catholic Church saw this tool being used to undermine the papal authority, and declared it as ‘evil.’ During the second half of the twentieth century, especially in democratic countries like the US, the broadcasting media have themselves become a major power centre. Since the majority of the intellectuals in these countries regard the media as a ‘watchdog’ over the actions of government, the media exercise tremendous political authority as well as economic power. Since very few, if any, major policy decisions can be made without media approval, government needs to reconcile itself to the media rather than control them. Indeed, whoever needs the media’s ‘seal of approval’ must appeal to the media.

Except for government financed channels, all media outlets are commercial and the goal of channels like ABC, NBC, and CNN is making profit, rather than playing the ‘watchdog’ role. Inevitably, the ‘watchdog’ role is often compromised by the need to make profit. A well-known example of this in the past was the relationship between the media and the cigarette industry. Cigarette companies paid huge amounts of money to the media which encouraged them not to discuss the harmful side- effects of smoking. ‘Information concerning the hazards of cigarette smoking was available as early as 1938 but was ignored, censored or played down by the media to such an extent that, even two decades later, only 44 percent of the people thought smoking was a cause of lung cancer’ (Jensen, 1993, p.212). In exchange for some benefits, the media can be manipulated to hide information and sometimes even give false information. Such a case occurred during the Reagan administration: each of the three big networks ABC, CBS and NBC was acquired by corporations that might have been unqualified under earlier FCC standards which Reagan lifted. In return, the big media dispensed relentlessly positive news about Reaganism and the great trickle-down dream (ibid., p.25). Furthermore, by writing positive news, ‘government lying was too willingly supported by the media’ (ibid., p.26). The general public are quite ignorant of the extent of distortion and false reporting. We are not speaking of hiding some few government blunders but of giving erroneous background information to favour a declaration of war or the application of murderously punitive economic sanctions against a country. Seriously independent, investigative journalists, such as those who publish annually The Censored Year Book, document many cases of disinformation and misinformation by the US media on serious issues that involve loss of human life. 

Following what they saw as the bias of the media during the Korean and Vietnam Wars, the American military made a study of the weak points of the media, as of an enemy. In particular, they realized that the media’s concern to find the most interesting, up- to-date and spectacular news so that their channel would be viewed by large audiences was more important to them than their ‘watchdog’ role: ‘the larger the audience, the more they can charge for advertising’ (Fitzgerald). The media’s need for high ratings made them vulnerable to bargaining pressure, which the military exploited as any business interest would. War crimes and horrors were not to be shown, if the media wanted access to the international which would secure their audience ratings. The media’s capacity to present war as a big show was first realized (and managed) by British officials during the Falklands conflict. They knew that if the media were denied other alternatives than showing the official propaganda footage, they would use the propaganda rather than have nothing to broadcast. The British experience became the pattern for US military officials who set up a new, semi-formal code for US media and military relations. Following the Falklands pattern, military officials in charge of the Grenada, Panama and Gulf wars made it clear to media executives (through, for example such agreements as the Pentagon’s ten-page list of rules, revised in January 1991) that if they did not misbehave by revealing war crimes or US casualties they would have access to their military show and would make some profit. The deal suited both sides. CNN Executive Vice-President Ed Turner said:‘In the end, we are going to co-operate [with the US military]’ (Sukow, 1991) revealing his desire not to miss the chance to air the curious military show about to happen in the Arabian desert. However, it was not a show, it was a war. As a result, just as arguments for a non-military resolution were denied prominence, so too the unpleasant realities of the imposed military resolution, including the loss of human life, were hidden from a world-wide audience.

Conclusion

The military evolved tactics against the media to influence them as they had once influenced the military, began with the Korean War. Until the beginning of the end of the Vietnam War, the relations continued in the same pattern. Following the British example in the Falklands, the US military had their own model of media control in place before the Grenada invasion, and had made it more effective still for the Panama invasion. During the Gulf War, in the latest phase of these evolving tactics, there began a new level of almost overt commercial co-operation between the US military and the US mass media.

Today media and military planners work together on the battlefield. In the Gulf War, reflecting on the effort the broadcasting companies and other mass media put into advertising the war and attaining public support for it, we can say that correspondents seemed as if they were working as members of the army: the media functioned as a department of the military with the task of achieving public support for the victory. The co-operation between the army and news media succeeded. In the Gulf War, many reprehensible acts were committed by the US and its allies such as the bombing of civilian targets, including shelters and apartments, or concocting lies in order to make propaganda against the enemy seem legitimate. Sometimes this was even done by means of the President, George Bush. However, the war was legitimized in the eyes of the US public, and also in the eyes of many people all around the world.

In the past, the relationship between the military and the media was not so close. For the sake of getting good and interesting coverage, in many cases, the media harmed the aims of the military by exposing their failures or wrong actions, such as in the Vietnam War. In response, military and government offices increased censorship and stopped media access to military and governmental sources. After a long struggle and animosity between the media and the military, they appear to have become wholly reconciled in a mode of co-operation beneficial for both sides: exciting coverage and an international audience for the media and unquestioning public support for the military and government policies. Today the media, knowingly or unknowingly, function as the US Army’s PR agent, and in return the military gives them an important and exciting international event to report, which everyone is curious to see: war.

References

• FITZGERALD, J. (1995) ‘Aesthetics & Media Criticism’. Lecture in Emerson College, Media Criticism Aesthetics course, January 19.
• JENSEN, C. (1993) The News That Didn’t Make the News and Why, The 1993 Censored Year Book, Sheburne Press.
• KARNOW, S. (1984) Vietnam: A History. The first Complete Account of Vietnam at War, Penguin Books, New York, NY, p.23.
• LEE, R. S.H. (1978) ‘Early Korean War Coverage’, Journalism Quarterly, 55, pp.789fl93.
• MARTINI, L. Director. Lines in the Sand. Griffin-Wirth Assoc. c.1991.
• SHARKLEY, J. (1991) Under Fire, The Centre for Public Integrity, pp.614.
• SUKOW, M. R. (1991) ‘The Storm and the Eye’, Broadcasting, January 14.

The first phrase: There is no god but God

This phrase provides for the human spirit, which is subject to innumerable needs and vulnerable to the attacks of countless enemies, an inexhaustible source of help. It opens for it the door to a treasury of mercy that can secure all its needs. In the phrase is a point of support that shows and makes known to the spirit its Master and Owner; its Creator; its true Object of worship, who possesses an absolute power that will secure it against the evil of all its enemies. In this way, this mighty phrase saves the heart from utter desolation and the spirit from grievous suffering, it is forever uplifting and the means of a continual felicity.

The second phrase: (He is) One

This phrase implies the following happy news, both healing and auspicious: the human spirit, which is connected to most species in the universe, and is overwhelmed in misery and confusion because of that connection, finds in the phrase ‘(He is) One’ a refuge and saviour that will deliver it from all that confusion and misery.

This phrase means to man

‘God is One. So do not tire yourself out seeking recourse to other things; do not demean yourself and feel obliged before them; do not humiliate yourself for security before them; do not give yourself trouble by following them, and do not tremble before them in fear. For, the King of the universe is One; He holds the key to all things, and the reins of all things. Everything is resolved by His command. If you have found Him, it means that you have obtained whatever you wish for; you have been liberated from an (otherwise) interminable indebtedness and innumerable fears.’

The third phrase: He has no partner

God is One in that He has no partner in His Lordship, in His acts and in His creating, nor in His Divinity or Sovereignty.

A worldly monarch may in theory have no partner in his sovereignty but, in the practical execution thereof, his officials act as his partners and/or as intermediaries between him and his people. Whereas, God, the Monarch of all times, has no need for partners or helpers in the execution of His Sovereignty, just as He has, in principle, no partner in His Sovereignty. Without His command and will, without His leave and power; not a single thing can interfere with another. Also, since He has no partner or helper, and there are no intermediaries between Him and His creatures, everyone can have recourse to Him directly at any time or place

This phrase, therefore, provides for the human spirit this glad tiding a man who has attained belief may, without hindrance, opposition or interference, in any state, for any desire, at any time and in any place, enter the presence of the Majestic, the All- Gracious, the All-Powerful One of perfection, who is the eternal Owner of the treasuries of mercy and bliss, and may present before Him his needs By seeking His Mercy and relying upon His Power, he can attain perfect ease and happiness.

The fourth phrase: His is the Kingdom

His is the Kingdom of all the heavens and the earth. So you are owned by Him and working in His Kingdom. This phrase implies the following joyful and healing news:

‘O man! Do not imagine that you own yourself for you are unable to administer even your own affairs You can neither maintain your spirit and body by providing for their needs and securing them against calamities, nor can you avoid exhaustion and ageing since you have no dominion over time or other agencies of decline. Therefore, do not suffer pain and torment without reason. Somebody else, not you, owns everything. That Owner is both All-Powerful and All-Compassionate; rely on His Power and do not accuse His Compassion. Renounce grief and anxiety, and accept relief. Be rid of your troubles and find serenity.’

The phrase also means: ‘This world that you love, to which you are connected, and which you see in disorder and are unable to put right, is the property of an All-Powerful and Compassionate One. So hand over the property to its Owner, leave it to Him, mind your own duty and do not interfere with His acts. Do not be troubled by what you are unable to overcome, and be at ease. The Owner of this property has free disposal of it and administers it as He wishes. But He is All-Wise, always acts for a wise purpose, and also He is All-Compassionate. So, whenever you take fright, say like Ibrahim Haqqi, “Let’s, see what the Master does; Whatever He does is always best,” and observe His acts with complete trust in Him.’

The fifth phrase: To Him belongs all the praise

Only God absolutely deserves praise and acclaim and only to Him is all indebtedness. His are all bounties and they come from His treasury. As for the treasury, it is infinite and inexhaustible. This phrase, therefore, implies this happy news:

‘O man! Do not be anxious that, one day, the bounties (you presently enjoy) will cease.

‘Know that the treasury of Mercy is inexhaustible. Nor cry out in anxiety over the possible cessation of enjoyment; every enjoyment you are granted is the fruit of an infinite Mercy Now the tree of that Mercy is undying, for each exhausted fruit is replaced with a new one. Furthermore, by reflecting on what you enjoy in an attitude of thanks and praise, since every enjoyment is in essence a favour from the Divine Mercy and, in so being a hundred times more enjoyable than the enjoyment by itself you will be able to increase it a hundredfold. If a glorious king presents you with an apple, the pleasure you take in being honoured by a royal favour will be superior to the material pleasure of a hundred, even a thousand, apples. Similarly, through the phrase ‘To Him belongs all praise’ will be opened to you the door of a spiritual enjoyment a thousand times sweeter than that you enjoy by itself, since this phrase makes you consider the bestowal of bounty, which in turn leads you to recognize the Bestower and to reflect on His merciful favours which are pouring out continually.’

The sixth phrase: He alone gives life

The One who gives life and sustains it through provision is He. Likewise, the Provider of life’s necessities is He, and the sublime aims of life and its important results are related to Him. This phrase therefore calls out to mortal and helpless man and gives him this joyful tiding:

‘O man! Do not bother to shoulder the heavy responsibilities of life; do not feel unease because the world is transient. Do not let the insignificant worldly fruits of life drive you to regret that you came to this world. Rather the ‘life mechanism’ in ‘the ship of your being’ belongs to the One Ever-Living and Ever-Self-Subsisting, so it is He who provides for all of life’s needs and expenditures. Further, there are innumerable aims in life directing it to many important results, nearly all of which are related to Him. You are just a ‘helmsman’ on that ‘ship’ of your being, so perform your duty properly. Obtain your wage and take the enjoyment that comes with doing so. Ponder how precious that ‘ship’ is and how valuable its benefits; and consider how generous and compassionate is the Owner of that ‘ship’. So, rejoice and give thanks, and grasp that, if you perform your duly righteously, all the results that life yields will, in one respect, be recorded as your good deeds to secure an immortal life for you in eternity.’

The seventh phrase: …and makes to die

He discharges you from the duty of life changes your abode from this transient world and releases you from the burden of service. That is, He takes you from a transient life to an eternal one. This phrase, therefore, says explicitly to mortal jinn and man:

‘Good news for you: death is not annihilation or going to non existence, nor is it eternal separation or a chance event without an author. Rather, it is being discharged form service by the Author who is All-Wise and All-Compassionate; it is a change of abode. It is being dispatched to ever-lasting happiness, to your true home. It is the door to union with the intermediate world, which is the place where you will meet with ninety-nine percent of your friends’

The eighth phrase: He is living and dies not

He is the One, Undying Object of Worship and Everlasting Beloved, who possesses a beauty, perfection and munificence wholly and utterly superior to the beauty, perfection and munificence to be observed in all creatures; who arouses love; a single manifestation of whose Beauty is sufficient to replace all other beloveds; who has an eternal life free from any trace of cessation or ephemerality and exempt from any flaw or defect. So, this phrase makes this joyful announcement to all conscious beings, including jinn and mankind, and to people of love:

‘Here is good tidings for you! There is an Eternal Beloved who will heal the wounds caused by countless separations from the ones to whom you give your heart. Since He exists and is undying, whatever may happen, do not worry about those others. Moreover; the beauty and good in them, the grace and perfection which cause you to love them, are but a passing through many veils, a dim, shadow- like manifestation of the Eternal Beauty of the Everlasting Beloved. Do not grieve, therefore, at their disappearance, for they are a kind of mirrors:through the changing of mirrors the reflection of that Beauty is renewed and becomes more radiant. When you find Him, you have found everything.’

The ninth phrase In His hand is all good

That is, He possesses all good and only He guides you to do good. Also, He records on your behalf any good, righteous deed that you do. Thus, this phrase announces to jinn and mankind this glad tiding:

O you helpless ones! When you move to the grave do not cry out in despair. “Alas! Everything we owned is destroyed and all our efforts have come to nought. We have departed that wide, beautiful world and entered this narrow grave.” Everything of yours is preserved: all your deeds were written down and every service you rendered was recorded. The All-Majestic, in whose hand is all good and who is able to do whatever is good, has summoned you in order to reward your service: He will keep you under the ground temporarily and then will bring you to His presence. How fortunate you are that you have completed your duty and service; your labour has ended, you are on the way to ease and mercy. Having gone through your period of toil, you are going to receive your wages.’

The All-Powerful One of Majesty, who preserves seeds and grains, which are the records of the activities and the deposit-boxes the services done in the last spring, and unfolds and publishes them the following spring in the most dazzling, abundant and benevolent manner, is undoubtedly preserving the results of your deeds also, in the same way, and will likewise reward your service in the most abundant manner.

The tenth phrase He is powerful over everything

That is, He is the One, Unique and Singular and He has power over everything. Nothing is difficult for Him. To create a whole spring is as easy for Him as to create a single flower and He creates Paradise with as much ease as He creates the spring. The countless creatures that He continually brings into existence every day, every year, every century, bear witness with innumerable tongues to His limitless power. Thus, this phrase, too, implies these glad tidings

‘O man! The service you offer and the worship you perform do not go for nothing. A world of reward, an abode of bliss, has been prepared for you. In place of this transitory world of yours, an everlasting Paradise is awaiting you. Have faith and confidence in the promise of the Majestic Creator whom you know and worship. It is inconceivable that He should break His promise. In no respect is there any deficiency at all in His power. Impotence can never interfere in His works. As He creates your small garden, He can also create Paradise for you. And He has created it and has promised it to you. Since He has promised, He shall certainly admit you to it.’

We plainly observe how every year on the earth He most speedily revives, yet with perfect order and ease, more than three hundred thousand species and groups of animals and plants. Such an All- Powerful One of Majesty is most certainly able to carry out His promise. Further, since He creates every year samples of Paradise, which He has promised through all His revealed books; since all His acts and functions are performed with truth and seriousness; and, as we witness in all His works, all perfections point to and testify to His infinite perfection, with no flaw or defect at all in Him, and since the breaking of a promise, lying, falsehood and deception are the ugliest of qualities, then most decidedly will that All-Powerful One of Majesty, that All-Wise One of Perfection, that All Compassionate One of Grace fulfil His promise: He will open the gate to eternal happiness and admit you, O people of faith, into Paradise, which was the original home of your forefather, Adam.

The eleventh phrase and unto Him is the return

Human beings are sent to this world of trial and examination with important duties and business and to do some particular services. After they have completed their duties, they will return and meet once more with their All-Munificent Master, the Majestic Creator; who sent them out in the first place. That is, they will leave this realm of transience, be delivered from the turbulent cycles of cause and effect and from the obscure veils of intermediaries, and will be honoured in the eternal abode in the presence of their Compassionate Lord and meet with Him without veil before His seat of everlasting kingdom. Everyone will find out directly who His Creator is, the Worshipped One, Lord, Master and Owner. Thus, this phrase implies the following news, much happier that all the rest:

‘O man! Do you know where you are going? Do you know to where you are being impelled? You are going to the sphere of Mercy, to the serene presence of the All-Beautiful One of Majesty. A thousand years of happy life in this world cannot be compared to one hour of life in Paradise, and a thousand years of life in Paradise cannot be compared to one hour’s vision of His Countenance of utmost beauty. The loveliness and beauty in all the creatures of this world, including those worldly loved ones by which you are so fascinated and stricken are merely a sort of shadow of a single manifestation of His Beauty and of the loveliness of His Names; and the whole of Paradise, with all its charm is merely a manifestation of His Mercy, and all longing, love and attraction are merely a gleam from the light of His Love. You are going into the presence of the One Eternally worshipped and Everlastingly Beloved, and are invited to Paradise, which is His eternal feasting place. Since this is so, enter the grave not with tears but with a smile.’

The same words also give this glad news:

‘O man! Do not be apprehensive, imagining that you are going to oblivion, extinction, non-existence, nothingness, decay and dissolution. You are going not to extinction but to permanence. You are being impelled not to non-existence, but to eternal existence. You are entering not the world of darkness but the world of His Light. You are returning to your true Owner, to the seat of the Eternal King.

You will not drown in multiplicity, but you will take your rest in the sphere of unity. You are bound not for separation, but for union.’

FROM THE RISALE-I NUR COLLECTION