This page explains a conceptual relation between two terms within Shahrur’s thought, and how this relation functions in the construction of meaning.
Meaning of the relation
This relation means that injustice occurs only from an agent who possesses free will and chooses the act intentionally. The point here is not that every wrong is injustice, but that injustice, in this conception, is a conscious, deliberate act with knowledge of its wrongness; therefore, it cannot be attributed to one whose will has been taken away. The evidence confirms that the realization of injustice is conditioned by freedom of choice, and that the example of Adam clarifies this meaning because he was described as unjust when he deliberately violated the prohibition concerning the tree.
The two terms of the relation
- First term: injustice
- Relation: requires
- Second term: free will
Evidence
- The State and Society via Injustice Needs Freedom
- Evidence: - Injustice, in Shahrur’s view, is not merely a passing mistake, but a conscious, deliberate decision with knowledge of its wrongness.
- The realization of injustice is conditioned on the presence of free will; one who has been stripped of will does not commit injustice.
- Adam represents the first transition into humanity; therefore, he was the first to be described as unjust when he deliberately violated the prohibition concerning the tree.
Its impact on the cognitive map
This relation gains its importance because it links an ethical concept with a foundational human concept within the broader intellectual structure. It thus ties injustice to responsibility and choice, rather than to the mere occurrence of harm, thereby distinguishing between an unintended act and an unjust act. It also helps map the human being’s place within the conceptual network as a free, accountable being, and it clarifies that Shahrur’s understanding of injustice falls within a broader conception of the state, society, the human being, and awareness of action.