Loupe Copy
Chevron Left
返回到 穆斯林世界的基本冲突

學生對 哥本哈根大学 提供的 穆斯林世界的基本冲突 的評價和反饋

4.8
星
549 個評分
•
156 條評論

課程概述

Learn what motivates the restive Muslim youth from Tunis to Tehran, what political positions Islamists from Mali to Chechnya are fighting for, where the seeming obsession with Islamic law comes from, where the secularists have vanished to, and whether it makes sense to speak of an Islamic state. Since 2009 there has been a renewed wave of popular unrest sweeping throughout much of the Muslim world. Secular, but generally repressive and inefficient autocracies have come under pressure or been swept aside entirely. At the same, the various Islamic Republics have not fared much better, but been convulsed by internal unrest, economic and social decline. Throughout the Muslim lands, existing constitutional arrangements are being challenged, often very violently. This course is a survey of the constitutional ideas and institutions that have developed since the mid 19th century throughout predominantly Muslim countries, but its focus will lie on the actors that have dominated this discourse and shaped its outcomes. We will look at the large body of classical writings on the Islamic state only in so far as it is necessary to understand the contemporary debate, but concentrate on the legal and political developments of the 20th and 21st centuries. Three common themes will characterise the course:  We privilege the study of the legal and social reality and seek to highlight where it is at odds with dogmatic stipulations, be they religious or constitutional.  We seek to illustrate the practical tensions posed by limited administrative capabilities and political legitimacy that resulted from the incomplete reception of modern bureaucratic statehood.  We seek to examine how popular dissatisfaction with the practical performance of Muslim governments has fuelled demands for greater accountability under the guise of cultural authenticity.  Ultimately, the course aims to equip participants to better understand Muslim contemporary discourse about the res publica, better contextualise the demands for religious law in public life, and to better ascertain the theoretical and practical feasibility of postulated religious alternatives to the still-dominant secular model of governance....

熱門審閱

LP

Nov 22, 2015

This course is really interesting and informative. It gave me a much better understanding for the history and politics behind some of the issues we are all facing today, and really broadened my mind.

NP

Dec 28, 2015

The course was good. But the real situation has been changing drastically. A supplement or extension of course is required to cover the up to date situation about IS activities, syria Iraq etc.

篩選依據：

151 - 穆斯林世界的基本冲突 的 153 個評論（共 153 個）

創建者 Joy S

•

Jan 07, 2017

Long, especially the week on Iran. Really proud of myself for getting through it.

創建者 Brice B

•

Nov 28, 2017

I have attended 24 courses on Coursera and this one is the worst by far. It is such a pity. I was very much looking forward to attending it. The course is poorly designed (for example, the lecturer doesn't begin by explaining what Islam is, what distinguish shiites and sunnis...). The lecturer makes almost no use of the media (apart from him reading his notes we only see a picture and a title from time to time), he is unbearably slow, stumbles on words (why didn't they re-shoot some of these sequences???). His course is an almost uninterrupted flow of words, with very little effort to hierarchize the claims he makes (slides would have helped doing just that), and, what is worst, he repeats himself time and again. His ideas are half-backed, as if he lacked the time to think things through. I have attended two weeks of the course and am amazed by how little I have learned. Don't loose your time watching this. Check out the books in the collection "Very Short Introductions to" instead. I have found them very helpful. It's such a pity...

創建者 Mariam

•

Feb 12, 2016

The professor has a very biased view of the Islamic world, which is heavily based on his opinion and approach not on the real facts and dominant his