Modern Technology, Preventive Ethics, and the Human Condition:

PREVENTIVE ETHICS, AN ISLAMIC APPROACH

Contrary to Descartes, Islam set the relationship between human beings and nature in a cooperative way; human beings in Islam are neither the masters of nature nor the possessors of it. Descartes thinks that man is “maître et possesseur de la nature” (the master and owner of nature), thus man can rule over nature and manipulate it for his own use. In Islam a human being is the trusted vigornasec of God on nature, meaning they do not own it, and must use it according to the law of God in the best possible way. On the other hand nature itself is being facilitated (Taskhir) by God to be used by mankind:

“Do ye not see that God has subjected to your (use) all things in the heavens and on earth, and has made his bounties flow to you in exceeding measure, (both) seen and unseen? Yet there are among men those who dispute about God, without knowledge and without guidance, and without a Book to enlighten them!” (Qur’an, 31:20)

The Qur’an clearly states that the misuse of nature and natural sources by human beings will lead to unbalance in life and to corruption and suffering. Human beings can bring corruption on earth and to the environment, and create a problem for future generations and for nature itself:

“Corruption has appeared on land and sea because of what the hands of men have earned, that (God) may give them a taste of some of their deeds: in order that they may turn back (from Evil).” (Qur’an, 30:41)

In Islam God is the creator of the entire universe including mankind. Human being is only a vicegerent of God on earth (khalifa) and is a trustee of God on Nature (not the master) in order to improve life on it:

“Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." (Qur’an, 2:30)

Now if we go back to Jonas’s question about “why should we have moral obligations towards future generations?” Every human being in Islam is unique and is created uniquely and enjoys a status higher than “value” which is called “dignity”, each person deserves respect as such due to this status of dignity. The human beings of the past generations are not of less value than the present generation; and the future generations are equally important. In the Qur’an God gave human beings (Children of Adam) a rank that goes beyond value, which is dignity, God says:

“And We have certainly dignified (honored =Karramna) the children of Adam and carried them on the land and sea and provided for them of the good things and preferred them over much of what We have created, with [definite] preference.” (Qur’an, 17: 70)

When God dignified human beings, then every human being becomes invaluable by the action of God Who gave this intrinsic worth through uniqueness.

-If Qur’an had given only value to humans, then human beings become valuable but at the same time replaceable by equivalent value.

-Since we know that there is no equivalent value for any human being (because of uniqueness).

-Therefore, every human being is irreplaceable, and has the intrinsic worth and respect that is called in the Qur’an Dignity.

In Islam the duty not to harm other human beings goes over time and covers the present and future generations because it revolves around the internal absolute worth and dignity of each person as such; and because God treat people equally and no one should be victimized nor be held special to cause harm.

Kant: Why should we respect a person?

Kant, in his bookGroundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals , discussed price and dignity:

“In the kingdom of ends everything has either a price or a dignity. If it has a price, something else can be put in its place as anequivalent ; if it is exalted above all price and so admits of no equivalent, then it has a dignity.”11 Kant considered value to be, that which bears equivalence in the process of exchange.12 The problem with this definition is that it does not make a distinction between the essence and the attributes. Human life is unique and invaluable. It is the very essence of attributes and values that we can possess. Life cannot be a subject of exchange simply because there is no equivalence to it.

The discussion of dignity and uniqueness, in the light of Kant’s philosophy, revolves around the idea that respect due to a person is related to autonomous action based on rationality and free will. This action must submit to the universal laws of ethics. But if this is the case, then lack of rationality means lack of dignity by default. This cannot be true. Consider a mentally challenged person, although he or she may not have the capacity for rational decisions we still respect that person, and he or she still possesses dignity. One might argue that the lack of privacy eliminates dignity. Unfortunately, the lack of privacy does not necessitate the lack of dignity. If rationality and privacy are not a major component of dignity, then what is dignity?

I believe a better definition of dignity must exist. Dignity of a person resides in the very control of the self, before it is even manifested in moral or legal actions. A simple example exists in the desires of the soul that have the least connection to morality and legality, such as the desire to eat. If the desire for food becomes the controlling factor in the personality to the extent that there is no concentration on social life, it is only on food, a person has not violated any moral universal law according to Kant. They will not be punished legally either. However, they will not be respected morally. The inability to control the self caused the repetition of fulfilling the desire. The desire is irrationally cloning itself. The more repetition, the less dignity. Controlling desires of oneself is a good sign of exercising power over power, and shows the ability of living moderately according to the law of God, not to our ability of rational justification. Thus, controlling our present desire to abuse nature by irresponsibly consuming; is a good way of exercising power over the power of the carelessness. Future generations are equally important, and should not be harmed. In Islam saving one soul is equal to the saving of all mankind.

“On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.” (Qur’an, 5:32)

God is the lawgiver who regulates (legally and morally) the relationship between human beings themselves, human being and nature, human beings and the rest of the creatures. Each person who is mature and mentally competent is an autonomous being and as thus responsible for his or her actions in this life and in the hereafter. They should treat each other according to a universal and an absolute code of ethics, not a relativistic or opportunistic one. God in His law (Shar’ah) defines right, wrong, good, evil, happiness, the forbidden (Haram) and the lawful (Hala), the encouraged, the discouraged, and the permissible. To live by the law of God (Shari’ah) is to ensure salivation in the hereafter. The law of God is reveled for one reason: To help people achieve their benefits and prevent them from causing harm.

The objectives of the Islamic law are to preserve the five necessities that are most essential to any society (Muslim or non-Muslim society) want to live properly, these five necessities are:

Religion

Life

Intellect

Procreation

Property

Islam also calls for a moral/legal protection through its famous rule of commanding the good and forbidding the evil and making this as both individual moral responsibility and the responsibility of state for legal regulation.

I hope that the above notes on the Islamic perspectives helped in answering Jonas’s question on why we have such a moral obligation towards the future generations, simply because in Islam this represents a respect for oneself through respecting humanity and there is no human being better than another; all are unique in the sight of God and deserve an equal opportunity to life.

Islam in its thrust to achieve justice does not allow a person to be held as a special case above others, all are equal and responsible.

We need to go back to see how Islam deals with the relationship between humans and nature by presenting what I call preventive Ethics. By preventive ethics I mean the rules and principles that deal with actions of avoiding harm, the non-melaficence acts that come in the form of prohibitions. In Islam, the command of God to prevent harm has no present tense; it encompasses the past the present and the future, since the message of God is intended to be to that last day of man on earth. One of the teachings of the prophet (pbuh) is that:

“Harm should not be inflicted and reciprocated.”

The meaning of this rule in the principles of Jurisprudence is to: prevent harm from happening in the first place and to remove it as soon as possible after it has happened, if occurred. Of course causing harm in Islam is

absolutely forbidden in any form, harm must be prevented whether it happens intentionally or unintentionally. There are five sub rules of this universal rule in Islam:

1. Harm should be prevented as much as we can

2. Harm must be removed

3. The greater harm can be prevented by lesser harm

4. Private harm should be tolerated to prevent public harm

5. Preventing harm has a priority over procuring benefits