Intercultural pragmatics and the clash of civilizations: Western and Muslim interactions before and since 9/11

Abstract

This paper is concerned with what is too often seen as the inevitable clash of civilizations between Western and Muslim peoples and nations. I argue against Quine's pessimistic conclusions regarding radical translation and in favor of Davidson's principle of charity, according to which communication can only be possible when each communicator takes the other party to be rational. I argue against the view that Muslims, including Muslim terrorists, are of necessity irrational, plead for a more charitable approach to their views of the relations between the West and Islam, criticize Huntington's view on the so-called clash of civilizations, and reject the notion of it as an unavoidable event. I then point out that other ways of dealing with the problem of Muslim terrorism are possible, ways that take into account the public opinion in the Muslim countries rather than relying on sheer force. From that point of view, I advocate a policy based on the Prisoner's Dilemma solution to the promotion of cooperation.