Rationality and Its Limits in Addressing Identity and Heritage in the Thought of Zaki Naguib Mahmoud

Abstract

This study offers a critical reading of Zaki Naguib Mahmoud’s intellectual project by examining the extent to which his later reflections on identity and heritage remained consistent with the rational foundations he explicitly endorsed in his earlier philosophical writings. It is based on the hypothesis that the central difficulty in his project did not emerge at the level of abstract principles but rather at the level of application, where maintaining the same degree of rational rigor proved more problematic when addressing issues of cultural belonging and civilizational identity. Employing a critical textual analysis of Mahmoud’s writings on identity, heritage, and Western civilization, the study argues that, despite moderating the strict verificationism of his positivist phase, he did not adopt explicit methodologies drawn from the contemporary human sciences. Instead, his engagement with heritage remained largely reflective rather than methodologically structured, making it closer to philosophical appraisal than to systematic analytical inquiry. Consequently, a noticeable tension emerged between Mahmoud’s commitment to rationality as a methodological ideal and its actual application in his treatment of identity and heritage.