عنوان مقاله [English]
Two important presuppositions that deny the existence of “Islamic economics” are discussed in this article and its positive (affirmative) implications are specified; presuppositions about the “ethical” and “functional” dimensions of economics; The first presupposition is that economic research and analysis merely expresses the relationships between economic variables and phenomena and are essentially in the realm of beings (existential affairs). The function of “economics” in society is different from the function of “religion” according to the second presupposition. In this article, an attempt has been made to examine these presuppositions with careful analytical-philosophical theories about the nature of “economics”, but, based on the opinions of some economists and in accordance with the subject documented by teachings and perceptions based on Islamic sources. Finally, in line with the critical issues presented in this paper, the opinion expressed on the nature of “Islamic economics” is presented.
12. Aumann, Robert J., “War and Peace”, Nobel Prize Lecture, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2005, Available at: <https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/aumann -lecture.pdf>.
13. Backhouse, Roger E., & Steve G. Medema, “Defining Economics: The Long Road to Acceptance of the Robbins Definition”, Economica, Vol. 76(S1), 21 September 2009A, Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2009.00789.x>.
14. Id., “Retrospectives: On the Definition of Economics”, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 23(1), 2009B, Available at: <https://doi.org/10.2307/27648302>.
15. Blaug, Mark, Great Economists since Keynes: An Introduction to the Lives & Works of One Hundred Modern Economists, Barnes & Noble, 1985.
16. Boulding, Kenneth E., “Economics as a Moral Science”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 59(1), 1969, Available at: <https://doi.org/10.2307/1811088>.
17. Conant, James B., Modern Science and Modern Man, Columbia University Press, 1952.
18. Gordon, H. Scott, “The Pragmatic Basis of Economic Theory”, The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/ Revue canadienne d'Economique et de Science politique, Vol. 16(4), 1950, Available at: <https://doi.org/10.2307/137857>.
19. Hausman, Daniel M., & Michael S. McPherson, “Taking Ethics Seriously: Economics and Contemporary Moral Philosophy”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 31(2), 1993.
20. Hausman, Daniel M. & Michael S. McPherson & Debra Satz, Economic Analysis, Moral Philosophy, and Public Policy, 3rd Ed., Reviews & Endorsements, Cambridge University Press, 2017, Available at: <http://www.cambridge.org/ro/academic/subjects/economics/ public-economics-and-public-policy/economic-analysis-moral-philosophy-and-public-policy-3rd-edition?format=HB&isbn=9781107158313##gQGWDpFRdOcbSzj4.97>.
21. Louçã, Francisco, The Years of High Econometrics: A Short History of the Generation that Reinvented Economics, Routledge Studies in the History of Economics, Routledge, 2007.
22. Marschak, Jacob, “Methods in Economics: A Discussion”, The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 49(3), 1941.
23. Martins, Nuno Ornelas, “Sen’s Capability Approach and Post Keynesianism: Similarities, Distinctions, and the Cambridge Tradition”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Vol. 31(4), 2009, Available at: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/27746874>.
24. Putnam, Hilary, The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays, Harvard University Press, 2002.
25. Stanford, Jim, Economics for Everyone: A Short Guide to the Economics of Capitalism, Illustrations by: Tony Biddle, Pluto Press, 2008.
26. Vogt, Christopher P., “Business, Capabilities Theory, and the Virtue of Justice”, in: Alejo José G. Sison & Gregory R. Beabout & Ignacio Ferrero (Eds.), International Handbooks in Business Ethics. Handbook of Virtue Ethics in Business and Management, Vol. 35, Springer Netherlands, 2017, Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6510-8_69>.
27. Wittgenstein, Ludwig, “I: A Lecture on Ethics”, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 74(1), 1965, Available at: <https://doi.org/10.2307/2183526>.