No abstract

Notions of the social good including rights, fairness, and economic efficiency influence our choices of law and policymaking. The discussion on social good is normally a heated one in pluralistic societies with multiple worldviews on the right thing to do. This article brings a novel Islamic perspective on the social good in pluralistic societies. In doing so, it makes and defends three propositions: first, religious notions of the social good, including those derived from the Islamic worldview, should not be excluded from public justifications when making moral and policy choices. There is no good reason for plural/secular societies to reject the benefits of religious presence in public discourse given the overwhelming evidence on religious precepts being a mobilizing force to promote co-existence and social cooperation. Second, Islamic notions of social good can contribute to that end. The article criticizes the common perception of Islamic ethics that views Islamic doctrine as a rigid positivist system which imposes inflexible moral codes limiting the influence of independent human intellect and agency. I show that Islamic notions of the social good are dynamic and adaptable to change. The third part of the article shows that the social good in Islamic doctrine has always been defined with reference to essential human needs, including the promotion of life, intellect, social cooperation, and justice. At their core, Islamic notions of the social good exhibit an overarching deontological orientation towards moral choices. They broadly overlap with comparative and influential frameworks on human flourishing, including the ‘Human Development Paradigm’ and the ‘Capabilities Approach’.

This article seeks to develop a better understanding of the normative nature of moral reasoning in Islamic legal theory (us * ul al-fiqh). This theory is built on a foundational proposition suggesting that moral evaluation must conform to the divine will, which aims to achieve an ethical state of affairs expressed as mas : lah : a (social good). Jurists use notions of mas : lah : a to interpret revelatory norms and make new rules to guide moral choices in applied ethics. However, very little is known about mas : lah : a's underlying nature of ethical value and normative content. In modern Islamic studies, mas : lah : a is commonly understood in consequentialist/utilitarian terms. In situations of moral uncertainty, Muslims should aim to promote choices that maximize the good. In this article, I offer three insights into the nature of moral reasoning in Islamic legal theory. First, I show that the common consequentialist/utilitarian thesis of Islamic moral reasoning is unsustainable. Second, both classic and modern Islamic jurisprudence introduced two conflicting visions of Islamic moral reasoning. One is rooted in rudimentary consequentialist approach while the other seems to contemplate deontological normativity in the Islamic system of ethics. Finally, I argue that the way forward is to reconcile these conflicting views in one hybrid normative framework to guide our understanding of the content of ethical value and normativity in Islamic legal theory. In this framework, I understand mas : lah : a as comprising first-order deontological principles to provide categorical protection for basic human needs while leaving room for consequentialist calculations of the right action.

No abstract