نوع مقاله : علمی ـ پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دکتری دانش اجتماعی مسلمین، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه تهران. تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول).
2 دانشیار، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه تهران. تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
This article provides a comparative analysis of Hans Jonas's "Ethics of Responsibility" and the foundations of Shia jurisprudence in the face of technological power. The central question of the research is to examine the relationship between two different moral frameworks: one based on modern philosophical rationality and the other based on revelation and jurisprudential reasoning (Ijtihad). The research findings indicate that both traditions, despite differences in ontological foundations and the source of moral authority, reach a common functional conclusion: the necessity of a priori limitation of technologies that have existential consequences for humans and the environment. However, there is a significant difference in the mechanism for realizing this responsibility; Jonas's ethics remains largely at the level of philosophical and moral recommendation, whereas Shia jurisprudence possesses the institutional and legal capacity to transform moral norms into social obligations. The final conclusion of this article is that the relationship between these two approaches is understandable not based on essential identity, but based on functional convergence and structural divergence, which facilitates dialogue between Islamic theology and contemporary technology ethics. This study was conducted using a conceptual-comparative analysis method. The comparison in this research is not based on superficial assimilation of concepts, but focuses on the normative function and internal logic of both the jurisprudential (Shia) and moral (Ethics of Responsibility) traditions.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)