How Can Bunge’s Scientific-Humanistic Ethics Engage Islamic Moral Law?

Abstract

In the eighth volume of his Treatise on Basic Philosophy (Bunge M, Treaties on Basic Philosophy. Vol. 8, Ethics: the Good and the Right. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1989) Mario Bunge articulates a detailed theory establishing ethics on the basis of a scientific philosophy. Analogously, the Islamic legal theorist of Andalusia, Shāṭibī (1320–1388 C.E.), sought to resolve massive Islamic doctrinal disagreements by establishing a common denominator that could unify the Islamic legal theories of his time. This paper argues that Shāṭibī’s ethical theory when compared with Bunge’s scientific-humanistic ethics, will (1) transform our understanding of the secular-religious divide in ethics and (2) will assist contemporary Islamic ethicists in finding common grounds with scientific-humanistic ethics.

Not all religious ethics are based on theological mythology or dominated by superstitious rituals, as Shāṭibī’s theory demonstrates. Equally, not all secular ethics lead to subjective relativism, anarchy, or loss of meaning as Bunge’s theory establishes. The symmetry between these two theories is seen in Shāṭibī’s concept of “moral hierarchy.” According to Shāṭibī, norms are not perpetually fixed. Rather, “necessities” take precedence over “needs” and these over “desirables.” Necessities are “pentagonal”, to mean the preservation of “social existence” takes precedence over the protection of the “self”; that over “mind”; that over “lineage”; and that over “property.”

In contrast, in Bunge’s ethics the satisfaction of “life” takes precedence over “health” and that over “happiness.” Doing the right according to Bunge is a social harmonization project by which everyone achieves their welfare without jeopardizing anyone else’s. The path from Shāṭibī’s Islamic ethics to Bunge’s modern one is a matter of updating the naturalistic and sociological grounds while abstaining from outdated theological language. This comparison should be of interest to scholars of cultural studies and global ethics that often operate under an assumption of inherent irreconcilability between premodern and non-western cultures on the one hand and western and modern cultures on the other.