The True, the Good and the Reasonable: The Theological and Ethical Roots of Public Reason in Islamic Law
Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 21 (1):5-69 (2008)
AbstractThe events of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent declaration of an open-ended “war on terror” have given a new urgency to long-standing discussions of the relationship of Islam to liberalism. In order to avoid the polemics that characterize much of the writing in the “Islam/Liberalism” genre, this Article proposes to use the framework set forth in John Rawls’ Political Liberalism to examine the grounds on which Muslim citizens of a liberal state could participate in a Rawlsian overlapping consensus. An overlapping consensus according to Rawls arises among citizens in a politically liberal state when they – despite holding incompatible theories of the good – each endorse the constitutional essentials of a politically liberal state for reasons within their own comprehensive religious or philosophical doctrines. This Article argues that the basis on which orthodox Muslims can participate in such an overlapping consensus can be found in Islamic theology and ethics. Because theology and ethics comprise the fundamental commitments of orthodox Islam, the political commitments set forth in Islamic substantive law which are inconsistent with constitutional essentials must be interpreted in light of those commitments. After describing orthodox Islam’s theological and ethical commitments to rational theological and moral inquiry, the Article argues that such commitments implicitly require political institutions that allow free theological and ethical inquiry. The Article illustrates this aspect of Islam by describing the development of a system of intra-Muslim normative pluralism in which the existence of conflicting ethical judgments was accepted as a legitimate and inevitable product of moral reasoning. The existence of normative pluralism in the realm of ethics, in turn, made the project of a legal system derived entirely from revelation an epistemological impossibility. The result was that Islamic substantive law was forced to adopt non-theological modes of justification. The Article argues that, in the course of so doing, Muslim jurists made appeals to what Rawls would deem to be public reason. The Article concludes with a series of examples from Islamic substantive law that illustrate the ways in which the pre-modern Islamic legal system represents a qualified form of public reason, consistent with the public culture of a liberal democracy
Similar books and articles
Islamic foundations for a social contract in non-muslim liberal democracies.Andrew F. March - unknown
Political liberalism, islamic family law and family law pluralism: Lessons from new York on family law arbitration.Mohammad Fadel - unknown
Public Reason Between Ethics and Law.José de Sousa E. Brito - 2012 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 25 (4):465-472.
Sources of moral obligation to non-muslims in the fiqh al-aqalliyyat (jurisprudence of muslim minorities) discourse.Andrew F. March - unknown
Reasonable pluralism and the domain of the political: How the weaknesses of John Rawls's political liberalism can be overcome by a justificatory liberalism.Gerald F. Gaus - 1999 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 42 (2):259 – 284.
Legal integration of Islam: a transatlantic comparison.Christian Joppke - 2013 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
The Ethics of Reasoning from Conjecture.Micah Schwartzman - 2012 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (4):521-544.
Political liberalism for post-Islamist, Muslim-majority societies.Meysam Badamchi - 2015 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 41 (7):679-696.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Citations of this work
Islamic perspectives on clinical intervention near the end-of-life: We can but must we?Aasim I. Padela & Omar Qureshi - 2017 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (4):545-559.
When must a patient seek healthcare? Bringing the perspectives of islamic jurists and clinicians into dialogue.Omar Qureshi & Aasim I. Padela - 2016 - Zygon 51 (3):592-625.
Paternity between law and biology: The reconstruction of the islamic law of paternity in the wake of dna testing.Ayman Shabana - 2012 - Zygon 47 (1):214-239.
When can Muslims withdraw or withhold life support? A narrative review of Islamic juridical rulings.Afshan Mohiuddin, Mehrunisha Suleman, Shoaib Rasheed & Aasim I. Padela - 2020 - Tandf: Global Bioethics 31 (1):29-46.
A defense of political constructivism.Nicholas Tampio - 2012 - Contemporary Political Theory 11 (3):305-323.
References found in this work
No references found.