seated relationship exists between Saudi society and the intellectual movement within, with the progress of one eliciting the progress of the other. This intellectual movement stems from an essential and pressing quest for knowledge as society at its core seeks change towards the course of civilization, a course dominated and governed by a general state of intellectual foresight. Since we have been described by some among us and in Western writings and literature as a dormant and traditional society, we have to ask, Are we really a dormant and traditional society or are we a dormant, traditional, contemporary and modernized society all at once? On the surface, we are apparently a society in touch with and reaching out to modernism, as is reflected in our architecture, shop windows, use of state-of-the-art equipment, luxury cars, and in our many other manifestations of the influence of globalization. But deep down, we are a traditional society. This is because of the existence of a social authority embodied in our legacy of customs and traditions that shape the prevalent mindset and part of our social identity in terms of appearanc, form and and innate nature towards others. According to the esteemed poet Nizar Qabbani, “We have draped ourselves with the outer crust of civilization, and our souls are unenlightened.” His insightful words sum up the state of our crusty civilization that has its soul still deep down in the dark ages. This accurate description does not apply to the state of a given country but to the state of the Arabs as a whole. It is a state of dissociation between thought and practise, between intellectual movement and that of social evolution, which creates a a vast gap between a mindset that seeks to break traditionalism, and a society that clings on to its traditionalism. Hence, we find ourselves facing more than a society – and not only one – and more than a state or condition – and not only one. The more this social multilateralism becomes a value and an advantage, the more burdensome it becomes. Yet, the more it constitutes an addition and a light on the road towards building a prosperous society, the more it will become a phase in the general growth and development of this society – provided a relationship exists between the intellectual movement and the drift of the society. We are at once thinking in a way that contradicts our practices and practising in a way that contradicts our thinking. This is happenning even as we believe in everything modern and new and seek to build a society based on social institutions, one that embodies the values of modernism and liberalism and helps us catch up with our times, that creates a different social structure marked by the priciples of citizenship of the country and not the tribe, clan or family, of the ideals of efficiency, competence and knowledge, not of loyalty, and the evaluation of the mind of a human being, not that of what that human being owns. To bring about probity and sincerity in this relationship between the movement of the mind and that of the society, our universities and scientific and cultural institutions must play an essential role of enlightenment. This is vital for us to avoid Qabbani's “crust” of civilization and modernism forming on our society and taking it back to the dark ages, for us to abort the cyclical birth of a society that only promotes appearances as we strive for our originality and relevance in the space of modernization.
