Repository | Book | Chapter
(2017) Post-islamist political theory, Dordrecht, Springer.
Why and how political liberals need to persuade muslims
ferrara and march's interpretations of conjecture
Meysam Badamchi
pp. 41-62
In this chapter I explore the potentials of the Rawlsian idea of conjecture for presenting a native theory of political liberalism for post-Islamist Muslim-majority societies. Although this Rawlsian idea can play a key role in uniting political liberalism and post-Islamism into one coherent project, it has been almost completely neglected in the existing post-Islamism literature. While Rawls's own treatment of conjecture was very brief, Ferrara and March have independently extended this idea to demonstrate politically liberal discourse's ability to accommodate the concerns of highly conservative religious groups in affirming democratic hyperpluralism (Ferrara) or liberal citizenship (March). Both authors view conjecture as a particular justificatory tool to overcome moral conflict between liberal values and any comprehensive religious or secular doctrine, especially Islam. The chapter ends with a discussion on Soroush, Shabestari and Kadivar's possible critical reactions to March's Treatment of Islamic Jurisprudence.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-59492-7_3
Full citation:
Badamchi, M. (2017). Why and how political liberals need to persuade muslims: ferrara and march's interpretations of conjecture, in Post-islamist political theory, Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 41-62.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.