In reality...

In reality, to try to fit ethical and legal knowledge into the framework of prescriptive expressions is either to consider them to be a sort of mental diversion or to be solely for the sake of meeting certain educational goals. The Criterion for the Truth and Falsity of Evaluative Propositions Ethical and legal propositions are explained in two ways: the first way is by describing the application of specific rules in a certain system.

For example, it is said, “Lying for the purpose of reconciliation is permitted in Islam,” or “Cutting the hand of a thief in Islam is obligatory,” and when a jurist or Muslim judge explains such precepts he does not need mention the ethical or legal system of Islam. Hence, the expression “according to Islam” is not usually employed. The criterion for the truth and falsity of such propositions is their correspondence or non-correspondence to ethical and legal references and sources.

The way of knowing them is to refer to sources related to the appropriate system. For example, the way of knowing the ethical and legal precepts of Islam is to refer to the Qur’ān and sunnah. The second way to describe their real application and the ‘case itself’ of their purport is with regard to the universal principles of ethics and law, including natural law, without paying attention to whether it is valid or not in a specific system of values or accepted by a given society.

Consider for example the following ethical propositions: “Justice is good,” or “One ought not to be cruel to anyone,” and such legal propositions as, “Every human has a right to life,” and “No one must be killed undeservingly.” There are a variety of views about this subject, and especially in Western ethical and legal philosophy, it has become an arena of conflict. A Review of the Most Famous Opinions The most famous opinions on this matter are the following: A.

Some of the Western philosophers of ethics and law basically deny the fundamental and proven principles, especially the positivists, who consider discussion of them to be vain and meaningless, as they are metaphysical and unscientific thoughts. Of course, as much is to be expected from the sympathizers of this school of so-called positivists, whose eyes are glued to the senses.