On Responsibility: Islamic Ethical Thought Engages with Jewish Ethical Thought

A remarkable amount of work on the study of Islamic ethical thought is published annually, covering an unprecedented variety of topics and themes. Yet despite the strides made, these debates have not addressed vital questions about how Islamic ethical thought can contribute to ongoing discourses that affect not only the Muslim community but society at large. In other words, how can we bring Islamic ethical thought into systematic engagement with modern philosophy? Specifically, how can Islamic ethical thought learn from contemporary philosophy, as it learned from Greek philosophy in the Middle Ages? And how might it be possible to develop Islamic ethical thought that can withstand both religious and rational scrutiny? In this programmatic overview, I respond to these questions by engaging with responsibility ethics within and beyond the Islamic tradition. As much as the debate about ethics has reached new heights in contemporary philosophical discourses, so too has the debate about responsibility re-emerged in theological discourses. In this paper, I bring into conversation the thought of Taha Abdurrahman on responsibility, which is nested within his larger paradigm of contemporary Islamic ethics, and Jewish thinker Hans Jonas’ concept of an ethics of responsibility. I argue that orchestrating this scholarly dialog between a 20th-century German Jewish thinker (Jonas) and a contemporary Muslim thinker (Abdurrahman) can lead to both a productive and constructive elaboration of Islamic ethical thought. Furthermore, I suggest that Habermas’ philosophy can serve as a bridge in this discussion, facilitating a comparative exploration of the ethical frameworks presented by both thinkers. By engaging with Habermas, we can highlight how Islamic thought can approach modernity, including philosophical debates, in a manner similar to that of 20th-century Jewish scholars like Jonas. This engagement not only enhances our understanding of responsibility within these traditions but also underscores the potential for interdisciplinary dialog in navigating contemporary ethical challenges.