Assistant Professor, Department of Theoretical Ethics, Research Center of Ethics and Islamic Psychology, Qur’an and Hadith Research Institute, Qom, Iran
Abstract: (660 Views)
One may claim that a clear distinction between jurisprudence and Islamic ethics is that there are non-obligatory rulings in jurisprudence and there are no such rulings in ethics. The main question of this article is to examine the truth of this claim: “Are there no non-obligatory rulings in ethics?” This article seeks to analyze and compare the non-obligatory rulings in jurisprudence and value judgments in ethics adopting the method of conceptual analysis. As a result, value judgments in ethics have the three properties of description, evaluation and practical demandingness, just like non-obligatory rulings in jurisprudence; in fact, value rulings may fall under non-obligatory rulings. Accordingly, ethics not only includes non-obligatory rulings, but constitutes notable achievements in value judgments which are useful for explaining jurisprudential non-obligatory rulings. Also, Muslim ethicists have neglected certain non-obligatory judgments, and it would be highly beneficial for improving moral discussions if these non-obligatory judgments were reconsidered and developed