Right

The current Cyber-ethics in Western societies (and its followers in other societies) have been compiled based on secularist presupposition. This presupposition has different principles in comparison with the Islamic attitude which can lead one to take a different approach toward ethical problems. This paper is an attempt to propose principles of Islamic cyber-ethics upon which we can prepare answers for the problems of cyber-ethics, having evident characteristics of an Islamic approach that are distinguished from secularist answers. After a prefatory study on the background of the Islamic attitude to ethics, these characteristics will be propounded under four categories: fundamental and content components, spiritual components, legal components, and penal components. Under these categories, themes such as giving importance to agent goodness, the basic difference in one’s goal of living an ethical life, the relation of reason and revelation, and the basis for the legitimacy of the penal justice system will be discussed. Needless to say, this paper does not seek to prepare arguments for this model, and such arguments can be discussed in other philosophical investigations.

This study seeks to examine the relationship between right and good - which is an emerging issue in moral philosophy - in the Qur'an. The Qur'an repeatedly introduces good and asks people to choose it in order to be saved. On the other hand, the Quran respects individual and social rights and warns against the violation of these rights. However, sometimes there is a conflict between right and good. In other words, accepting a belief or doing an action, although it is a human's right, but it is not good for him Respecting this free will, the Qur'an advises humans to prioritize good over right as long as it is possible and does not harm the rights of others. The Qur'an advises that in the conflict between the individual right and the good, the good should be preferred, but in the conflict between the collective right and the good, the right should not be ignored as long as the owners of the right have not consented. Prioritizing the good, especially in the fields of worship that have more individual aspects, should not be accompanied by coercion because it violates human free will. The present research has extracted and discussed examples of compatibility and conflict between truth and goodness in the Qur'an by using the analytical descriptive method after introducing the examples of right and good

In this essay I examine Hegel’s critique of England and France in his own day, and I argue that this critique sheds light on what he would say about constitutional states in the twenty-first century. Hegel’s critique is based on the normative “idea” of freedom he sets out in his Philosophy of Right (1820). This idea, which in Hegel’s view determines what rights and institutions are necessary for true freedom, gives a central role to what he calls “corporations” — business or trade associations, but also local communities and towns — in the free, rational state. The purpose of these corporations is twofold: first, to render economic activity cooperative and “ethical”, and so to prevent the emergence of systematic poverty, and second, to send delegates to the legislature who represent legitimate interests in civil society, rather than just numbers of people. Hegel argues, however, that corporations disappeared or were abolished in England and France and that this led to extreme poverty in England and to the “liberal” idea in France that political authority should derive from the individual will (an idea that in turn sets the “people” permanently against government). I argue that poverty and individualistic “liberalism” remain problems in the twenty-first century, and that a Hegelian solution to these problems would be to reintroduce corporations (or their equivalent) something that Hegel himself advocated in the 1820s. Hegel’s alternative to unrestrained capitalism and liberalism both of which he thinks undermine true freedom and right is thus not, as Marx recommends, to abolish the system of free production and exchange altogether, but to imbue citizens with an ethical concern for one another in their economic and political life an ethical concern that is grounded in corporations, associations and other communities.