Response to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar
Professor Fadel sees me as claiming that the Islamic secular “places jurisdictional boundaries on what religion can rightfully claim, thereby creating a legitimate space for non-religious, i.e., ‘secular’ reason.” What actually I argued, however, was that Sharia placed limits on its own shar‘ī juri...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
International Institute of Islamic Thought
2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/eb1d1c0ae3fe445d8995a0fac370fd9f |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:eb1d1c0ae3fe445d8995a0fac370fd9f |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:eb1d1c0ae3fe445d8995a0fac370fd9f2021-12-02T19:41:21ZResponse to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar10.35632/ajis.v34i2.7662690-37332690-3741https://doaj.org/article/eb1d1c0ae3fe445d8995a0fac370fd9f2017-04-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ajis.org/index.php/ajiss/article/view/766https://doaj.org/toc/2690-3733https://doaj.org/toc/2690-3741 Professor Fadel sees me as claiming that the Islamic secular “places jurisdictional boundaries on what religion can rightfully claim, thereby creating a legitimate space for non-religious, i.e., ‘secular’ reason.” What actually I argued, however, was that Sharia placed limits on its own shar‘ī jurisdiction, obviating the necessity-cum-legitimacy not of non-religious, secular reason but of religious secular reason. He appears to be unable to transcend the commonly held dichotomy between the secular and the religious (which my article calls directly into question) and thus to recognize the reality of the “Islamic secular” as I define it. This underwrites a profound misreading of my thesis ... Sherman JacksonInternational Institute of Islamic ThoughtarticleIslamBP1-253ENAmerican Journal of Islam and Society, Vol 34, Iss 2 (2017) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN |
| topic |
Islam BP1-253 |
| spellingShingle |
Islam BP1-253 Sherman Jackson Response to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar |
| description |
Professor Fadel sees me as claiming that the Islamic secular “places jurisdictional
boundaries on what religion can rightfully claim, thereby creating a legitimate
space for non-religious, i.e., ‘secular’ reason.” What actually I argued,
however, was that Sharia placed limits on its own shar‘ī jurisdiction, obviating
the necessity-cum-legitimacy not of non-religious, secular reason but of religious
secular reason. He appears to be unable to transcend the commonly held
dichotomy between the secular and the religious (which my article calls directly
into question) and thus to recognize the reality of the “Islamic secular”
as I define it. This underwrites a profound misreading of my thesis ...
|
| format |
article |
| author |
Sherman Jackson |
| author_facet |
Sherman Jackson |
| author_sort |
Sherman Jackson |
| title |
Response to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar |
| title_short |
Response to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar |
| title_full |
Response to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar |
| title_fullStr |
Response to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Response to Professor Fadel and Professor Iqtidar |
| title_sort |
response to professor fadel and professor iqtidar |
| publisher |
International Institute of Islamic Thought |
| publishDate |
2017 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/eb1d1c0ae3fe445d8995a0fac370fd9f |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT shermanjackson responsetoprofessorfadelandprofessoriqtidar |
| _version_ |
1718376237316964352 |