This article seeks to address the challenge of religious plurality by drawing upon political theory literature. It proceeds to review, but ultimately reject, three models for dealing with diversity of religious outlooks: (i) the model of public reason (primarily as articulated by John Rawls); (ii) refinements to the model of public reason from responses to and critiques of Rawls; and (iii) the model of ‘religious transformation’. As an alternative, this article will suggest a new, fourth, model called ‘justice as discourse’, which it will argue is a better framework for addressing the challenge of religious diversity and more conducive to social sustainability.
Bio: Arif Jamal is an Assistant Professor of Law at NUS. He studied politics (BA) and law (LLB) in Canada and was called to the Bar of British Columbia. Thereafter, he undertook post-graduate work in the UK earning an LLM degree, focusing on Islamic law, at the School of Oriental & African Studies (SOAS) and then completing his doctorate the Faculty of Laws at University College London (UCL). Before joining NUS, Arif taught at UCL Laws and at the School of Law at SOAS and he was also a Visiting Researcher with the Islamic Legal Studies Program at Harvard Law School. Arif’s research and teaching interests include legal and political theory, law and religion and law in Muslim contexts.
via Addressing Religious Plurality: A Consideration of Four Models.
http://law.nus.edu.sg/about_us/faculty/staff/profileview.asp?UserID=lawaaj
Related:
Arif Jamal: Principles in the Development of Ismaili Law
Challenges of faith and education discussed at a seminar arranged by AKU-ISMC
Relating Law and Ethics by Arif Jamal
Ismailimail 