درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Among conventional approaches to abortion, the conflict between the fetus's right to life and the woman's right to control her body is central to many ethical debates. In contrast, a novel approach in the ethics of pregnancy reexamines this issue through moral intimacy and interpersonal relationships. Margaret Olivia Little, in her influential article "Abortion, Intimacy, and the Duty of Pregnancy" (1999), offers a distinctive framework that moves beyond rights-based and utilitarian perspectives. She argues that pregnancy is not merely a biological process but a deep personal relationship. Therefore, moral duties toward the fetus cannot be understood independently of the pregnant woman's attitudes and assessment of that relationship. Little redefines abortion as a question of moral intimacy and the woman's evaluative authority. However, her theory faces serious criticisms: conditioning moral duty on individual assessment invites relativism; focusing on intimacy overlooks the role of causal responsibility in shaping moral duties; and it neglects the moral weight that secular and religious traditions assign to fetal life. This article acknowledges the value of Little's relationship-centered approach as an important corrective to overly abstract theories but aims to show that her perspective does not provide sufficient grounds for explaining the moral duties associated with pregnancy.

This study seeks to elucidate the ontological foundations of ethics in the Qur’an through a re‑reading of the central concept of Ḥaqq in light of the Theory of Existential Fittingness. Formulated in response to the challenge of grounding moral value while avoiding reductionist approaches, this theory conceives value as an objective reality arising from a fitting existential relationship among beings—one in which each being occupies its proper place. In this perspective, ethics may be understood as the extension of the wise order of being into the sphere of human voluntary action. The central question of the article is whether the Qur’anic concept of Ḥaqq can be understood as expressing this existential worthiness and as articulating the principle that regulates the relations constitutive of the world. Adopting a descriptive–analytical method, the study employs the Theory of Existential Fittingness not as an a priori interpretive presupposition but as a posteriori explanatory framework for understanding Qur’anic data. Following a semantic analysis of Ḥaqq, the article examines its Qur’anic usages across three horizons: creation, becoming (takwīn), and resurrection (qiyāmah). The findings indicate that in the Qur’anic logic Ḥaqq extends beyond mere propositional truth and denotes existential worthiness. In the horizon of creation, Ḥaqq signifies the principle of the wise establishment of the world and the negation of futility. In the horizon of becoming (takwīn), it functions as the criterion of endurance and perishing, such that Bāṭil represents an unfitting realization destined to vanish. In the horizon of resurrection, Ḥaqq is manifested in the weighing of deeds, where the value of each human action is measured according to the degree of existential fittingness it embodies. Ultimately, the study argues that this re‑reading presents the Qur’anic moral order not as a merely conventional construct but as the reflection of an ontological law rooted in the objective structure of reality. By bridging the is–ought gap, this approach provides a robust framework for resisting moral relativism within the Qur’anic paradigm.

Traditional paradigms of public administration often rely on rational-actor models, assuming that policy formulation is a purely objective, logical process. This paper challenges that assumption by examining governance through the lens of Cognitive Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). Utilizing Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), this study argues that the foundational architecture of public policy is intrinsically metaphorical (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). Metaphors are not mere rhetorical embellishments; rather, they constitute the cognitive infrastructure that dictates problem definition, constrains epistemological horizons, and limits the spectrum of viable policy solutions (Kövecses, 2010; Lakoff, 2004). By analyzing cross-cultural linguistic mappings, embodied cognition, and dominant policy frames, this paper explores how “Grand Metaphors” covertly structure macro-level political decision-making in domains such as environmental crisis management, macroeconomics, and international relations. Ultimately, the paper advocates for “metaphorical literacy” among policymakers, arguing that the deliberate reframing of governance paradigms—shifting from militaristic and control-based metaphors to ecological and systemic ones—is an essential prerequisite for sustainable public administration.