Abstract
The approach of Iranian intellectuals toward Western modernity has been one of the most pivotal issues in the contemporary history of Iran. This study first addresses the arrival of Western modernity in Iran, analyzing three models of modernization: military modernization, legislative modernization, and institutional modernization. It then examines and compares the philosophical views of Seyyed Ahmad Fardid and Reza Davari, as two prominent critics of modernity in Iran. Fardid’s perspective is grounded in Iranian dualism, Ibn Arabi’s concept of divine names, and Heideggerian critique of modernity, whereas Davari’s viewpoint is rooted in Farabi’s virtue ethics and a Heideggerian critique as well. This study reveals that Fardid’s confrontation with the West led to an "anti-Western" approach, while Davari’s resulted in a "critical approach to the West." The data for this research is gathered through a library-based method, drawing on both philosophers' works and analyses conducted on their philosophical views. The conclusion examines the fundamental differences between these two approaches and their social and political implications in Iran.
Keywords: comparative method, Modernity ds, historical change, the West, Fardid's philosophical views ,Davari philosophical views.
 
Introduction
The arrival of modernity in Iran, particularly during the Qajar period, introduced fundamental changes to the nation’s political, social, and cultural structures. Modernity, beyond simply representing a collection of Western technologies and tools, brought new concepts like rationality, individualism, and secularism, which spurred Iranian thinkers and intellectuals to confront these emerging ideas. Among these thinkers were Seyyed Ahmad Fardid and Reza Davari. Fardid, a profound critic of the West, anchored his criticism in Heideggerian thought as well as Ibn Arabi’s theory of divine names, viewing Western modernity as a threat to Iranian identity. In contrast, Davari, while critical of modernity, did not dismiss it entirely. Instead, he proposed a nuanced critique that considered modernity as a step towards development, albeit an incomplete one, in the Iranian context. This research aims to analyze and compare these two thinkers’ perspectives on modernity and their influence on Iranian society.
 
Materials & Methods
1. How do Seyyed Ahmad Fardid and Reza Davari approach Western modernity and its impact on Iranian society?
2. What are the similarities and differences in their perspectives?
3. What are the social and political implications of these two perspectives in Iran?
This study is based on the premise that while Fardid’s and Davari’s views both criticize modernity, they differ fundamentally in the nature and objectives of their critiques. These differences may lead to varying societal responses to the West and modernity in Iran. Fardid views modernity as a threat to Iranian identity, leading to an anti-Western stance, while Davari proposes a critical engagement, suggesting that aspects of modernity can aid in Iran’s development.
This research employs a descriptive-analytical approach, using library-based resources, including Fardid’s and Davari’s works, related interpretations, and analyses on their perspectives toward modernity. Through comparative analysis, the study delves into the fundamental differences and commonalities between these two views.
 
Discussion & Result
The introduction of modernity to Iran brought about structural transformations in society, from education systems to daily lifestyles. Due to increasing inequality and the perceived erosion of local cultures, Iranian intellectuals began critically evaluating Western modernity and its implications. Seyyed Ahmad Fardid, as one of the earliest Iranian philosophers to critique modernity, viewed it as a catalyst for alienation from Iranian culture and identity. Rooted in Heideggerian philosophy and Ibn Arabi’s divine names concept, Fardid saw modernity not only as ineffective but as a direct threat to Iranian-Islamic values. He argued that the only way to resist the Western onslaught was through total rejection.
In contrast, Reza Davari, while similarly critical of modernity, did not advocate a total rejection. Drawing from Farabi’s virtue ethics and Islamic philosophy, Davari perceived modernity as a learning opportunity, suggesting that Iran could selectively embrace aspects of modernity to foster development, as long as these elements were aligned with Iran’s cultural and social conditions. In his view, adopting certain facets of modernity could be beneficial if they were critically assessed and adapted to fit local needs.
These contrasting views have significantly impacted Iranian policies and approaches to the West and modernity in recent decades. Fardid’s absolute rejection of the West has promoted a perspective that prioritizes strengthening Iranian-Islamic identity, opposing modernization efforts that align with Western ideals. On the other hand, Davari’s critical approach allows policymakers to consider modernity as a tool for progress without necessarily abandoning Iranian identity.
 
Conclusion
The comparative analysis of Seyyed Ahmad Fardid’s and Reza Davari’s philosophical views highlights their contrasting approaches to Western modernity. While both philosophers share a critical stance toward modernity, they diverge significantly in their ultimate goals. Fardid, deeply influenced by the philosophy of Ibn Arabi and Heidegger, posits a total rejection of the West, considering it a fundamental threat to Iranian identity. In contrast, Davari’s view, shaped by Farabi’s ethical framework, advocates for a selective critique, suggesting that Iran can advance by critically incorporating aspects of modernity that align with its cultural values. These divergent perspectives reflect broader societal and political debates within Iran regarding the role of modernity and the nation’s relationship with the West.