Abstract
The principle of ethical endogeneity underlying humanistic institutional economics is central to the economic principles of Islam. Through this approach to major economic problems in contemporary times, Islamic economics presents an alternative that is institutional in nature and at the same time different from all received economic doctrines. Only under restrictive conditions of consumption, production and distribution can the results of resource allocation in Islamic economics be made to approximate to the other paradigms. Islamic economics can thus be considered a direct derivative of the general theory of humanistic institutional economics with assumptive extensions to other areas of economics with humanistic elements in them. Our focus in this chapter is on the Islamic economic resolution of the great economic problems of contemporary times in an integrated fashion and under the ethical endogeneity principle of humanistic institutional economics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
Ibn Taimiyyah, Al-Hisbah Fil-Islam (Beirut, Lebanon: Darul Kutbal-Arabiyyah, 1967).
M. Muslehuddin, Insurance and Islamic Law (Lahore, Pakistan: Islamic Publications, 1969), Ch. 6, makes the following analogy in regard to the exegesis of the following Quranic verse. ‘God has permitted trade and forbidden riba (Quran, Sura II, v. 275). “The right of ijtehad” may be used in regard to questions on which there is no clear text, by every Muslim who is qualified to exercise it ... To illustrate it more specifically the above-cited Quranic verse: “God has permitted trade and forbidden riba”, is manifest or zahir with regards to the legality and illegality respectively of two transactions, and explicit or nass in distinguishing riba from trade. But is vague or mujmual as to the meaning of riba which requires interpretations.’
R. Heilbroner and L. C. Thurow, The Economic Problem (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984), Ch. 29.
R. G. D. Allen, Macroeconomic Theory, A Mathematical Treatment (London: Macmillan, 1967), Ch. 14.
R. C. Edwards et al. (eds), Labour Market Segmentation (Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath, 1975).
J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1944).
M. Friedman, ‘The Methodology of Positive Economics’, in M. Friedman, Essays in Positive Economics (Chicago, Ill.: Chicago University Press, 1953).
Ilse Rosenthal-Schneider, ‘Presuppositions and Anticipations in Einstein’s Physics’, in P. A. Schilpp (ed.) Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist (New York: Tudor, 1951).
J. Pheby, ‘Inductivism and Deductivism in Economics’, in J. Pheby, Methodology and Economics, a Critical Introduction (London: Macmillan, 1988).
A. Einstein, The World as I See It (New York: Covici Friede, 1934).
B. Russell, ‘Philosophical Consequences’, in B. Russell, ABC of Relativity (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1971).
F. Capra, The Turning Point (London: Fontana, 1983).
K. R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London: Hutchinson, 1959).
T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1970).
See the mathematical appendix to J. Hicks, Value and Capital (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968).
M. Novak, A Theology of Radical Politics (New York: Herder & Herder, 1969); T. O. Nitsch and B. J. Malina, ‘On the Role of the Transcendent in Human Economy: Towards a New Synthesis’, Humanomics (Vol. 1, No. 3, 1985).
G. J. Dorrien, The Democratic Socialist Vision (Totowa, New Jersey,: Rowman & Littlefield, 1986).
I. Lakatos, The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978).
D. R. Fusfeld, The Age of the Economist (Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman & Co, Inc. 1986), Chs 3–6.
G. Myrdal, ‘Utilitarianism and Modern Economics’, in G. R. Feiwel (ed.), Arrow and the Foundations of the Theory of Economic Policy (London: Macmillan, 1987).
M. A. Choudhury, Islamic Economic Co-operation (London: Macmillan, 1989).
The conclusion established here contradicts the view expressed elsewhere: see H. Hosseini, ‘Islamic Economics — A New Economics or an Old Dogma?’ Forum for Social Economics (Vol. 16, No. 2, Spring 1987). For other good articles in the area of Islamic economic paradigm building refer to, M. Arif, ‘The Islamization of Knowledge and Some Methodological Issues in Paradigm Building: The General Case of Social Science with a Special Focus on Economics’, The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences (Vol. 4, No. 1, 1987); M. Arif, ‘Toward a Shariah Paradigm of Islamic Economics: The Beginning of a Scientific Revolution’, The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences (Vol. 2, No. 1, 1985); V. Nienhaus, ‘Restatements of Normative Economics: Western Approaches and Islamic Perspectives’, in M. A. Choudhury (ed.), Policy-Theoretic Foundations of Ethico-Economics (Sydney, Nova Scotia: The Centre of Humanomics, University College of Cape Breton, 1988).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1992 Masudul Alam Choudhury
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Choudhury, M.A. (1992). Resolution of the Great Economic Problems in Contemporary Times in Islamic Economic Perspectives. In: The Principles of Islamic Political Economy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22439-5_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22439-5_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-22441-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-22439-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)