Correct Grammar is an easy to use, powerful and inexpensive grammar checker suitable for IBM personal computers and compatibles. It installs in minutes, is readily customized, and is designed to work with all major word processor programs such as WordPerfect, WordStar and Microsoft Works. It will also process ASCII files. I highly recommend Correct Grammar. It is a fine program.

In this book, Jiwei Ci explores the dual nature of justice, in an attempt to make unitary sense of key features of justice reflected in its close relation to ...

Çatı, eylemin özne veya nesneyle ilişkisinin niteliğini açıklayan bir kavramdır. Türkçede çatıya ilişkin kavramlar, özne ve nesne esas alınarak oldukça işlevsel bir biçimde sınıflandırılmıştır. Türkçedeki çatı kavramlarının Arapçadaki karşılıkları ise fiil kalıplarının anlamları başlığı altında yer alır. Bu anlamların ve ilgili kavramların Arapçada kendine özgü bir sistematiği ve mantığı vardır. Anadili Arapça olanlar için bu sistematik, tutarlı ve anlamlı bir yapı arz eder. Ancak anadili Türkçe olanların, Arapçada fiil kalıplarının anlamlarını ve çatı kavramlarını anlama ve anlamlandırmalarına katkı sunacak bir sınıflandırmaya (...) ve yaklaşıma da ihtiyaç vardır. Fiil kalıplarının anlamları çeşitli çalışmalara konu edilmiştir. Ancak çatı kavramları iki dilde karşılaştırılmamıştır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Arapçadaki çatı kavramlarını, Türkçedeki çatı tasnifi üzerinden sınıflandırarak, onları Türkçeleriyle karşılaştırmaktır. Ayrıca Arapçadaki fiil kalıplarının çatı dışındaki anlam ve işlevlerine, Türkçe dilbilgisi kavramları perspektifinden bir yaklaşım geliştirmektir. Bu çalışmada, Arapçada çatı karşılığında kullanılan bina kavramının, Türkçedeki çatı kavramını da içeren daha geniş bir kavram olduğu, müteaddî teriminin, Türkçedeki geçişli, oldurgan ve ettirgen kavramlarının karşılığı olarak kullanıldığı, dönüşlülük olgusunun ise iki dildeki tarifinin farklı yapıldığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Türkçedeki çatı tasnifinin esas alınarak Arapçadaki çatı kavramlarını sınıflandırmanın Arapça çatı kavramlarını anlama ve anlamlandırma açısından da işlevsel olduğu değerlendirilmektedir. (shrink)

This article discusses the issue of arrangement /ordering of compulsory-comprehensive maqāsid. In this respect, the main purpose is to help clarify the ordering problem. To accomplish this task, the classical and contemporary studies on this subject were reviewed. Within the scope of this research, it has been determined that the universal principles are generally listed in the order of religion, nafs, mind, generation and property. However, alternative orderings can be found where the nafs is placed at the forefront. The focal (...) point of the ordering problem is emerges from the question of whether Allah's rights/otherworldly maqāsid should be priorities or servants' rights/worldly maqāsid. The conflict between religion, which is an otherworldly value, and other principles played an active role in this classification of maqāsid. Many legal scholars who placed religion in the first place in the classical period did not clearly explained the justification of their arrangement. Also, many of today's researchers also stated that religion should come first. The scholars who put both the religion and the nafs in the center have listed many evidence for their preference. The legal scholars who put religion at the center have pointed the verse " I have not created the jinn and men but they may worship Me" as the basis for their views. Accordingly, the main purpose of the creation of human being is to serve Allah. Because the most important right to be fulfilled is the right of Allah religion should take precedence over other virtues in maqasid. Religion is also the only essential way that leads to eternal happiness. According to the legal scholars who put religion into the center, other maqasid principles are secondary. Correlatively, other principles serve religion. The hadith "The debt to Allah is more worthy of being paid." has been made the basis. Since religion constitutes the essence of the maqāsid, it is also a requirement of reason to make religion essential. According to another reason they stated, the obligation of jihad also ensures that religion is at the center. The obligation of jihad causes lives to be sacrificed to protect the religion. This means that religion is superior to the nafs and other principles. Because jihad, which is the order of religion, is fard. The scholars who maintain that the rights of the servants should take precedence over the right of Allah have cited also a lot of evidence. We come across with their views presented as a weak view in the sources or as an answer to a possible question. There is no clear information about to whom these views belong. Therefore, it is stated that no one introduces the nafs to religion. As a matter of fact, it is stated that it is not correct to qualify these views as an independent view defended by scholars. In other words, the view putting the nafs at the center and the evidence to this preference at this point should be regarded as hypothetical. We are of the view that these claims of contemporary writers need to be proven. The basic reason of the views that puts the nafs in the center is based on the pre-acceptance that maslahahs like the nafs are the right of servants while religion is the right of Allah. The given reasons can be addressed under three main headings: punishments, mitigation of prayers, and concern with non-Muslims. In case where the rights of the servant and Allah unite, the rights of the servant should be preferred. Because, the rights of servants are on hardship, and the rights of Allah are on breadth and mercy. On the contrary to the rights of the servants, postponing or neglecting the right of Allah will not harm Allah. It is clear that if the rights of the servants face postponement, they will suffer serious damage. The fact that killing a man who both abandoned his religion and killed someone unfairly, not for his departure from religion, but for retaliation, that is, the right of a servant, is a concrete example of this. The shortening of the prayer during the journey, the patient’s abandoning standing in prayer and the fasting, and other examples also require the human to be in the center. Today, there are researchers who take the nafs to the center. The existence of religion for humans and society reflects the view of these researchers. Because it is clear that religion will remain dysfunctional where there is no human and society. When these evidences are examined carefully, it can be concluded that the opinion that defends the nafs to be at the center of comprehensive maqāsid is preferable. (shrink)

Descartes’ metaphysical project revolves around the themes of the self, God, and the external world. He takes the self as a thinking substance by separating it from the extended substance. Unlike God – the uncreated substance – the self and the external world are considered to be created substances. This paper has three objectives. The first is to find out Descartes’ answer to the question of what the self and the external world are by examining existence and persistence. The second (...) is to show how Descartes demonstrates the self-getting access to this world. The last is to point out the deficiency in his metaphysical project, namely, the deficiency in his accounts of the self, the external world, and the relation between them. This paper attempts to make up for this deficiency by putting the missing piece, i.e., time into its place. (shrink)

: The Confucian relational concept of the person has been proposed as an epistemically more cogent and ethically more attractive alternative to that of liberal individualism. Two arguments are raised against this proposal without defending liberal individualism. Ethically, Confucianism is vitiated by certain unattractive features that cannot be removed without reducing the Confucian relational concept of the person to an abstract and not very helpful notion of human relatedness. Epistemically, Confucianism commits the essentialist fallacy of treating its own concept of (...) human relations as reflecting the nature of things. In view of these limitations, the Confucian relational concept of the person does not provide a viable framework for dealing with social issues including bioethics. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Legitimacy, Performance, and Political Realism:Response to Ben CrossJiwei Ci (bio)Ben Cross raises important issues in his article and provides a much appreciated occasion for me to join the discussion. He targets his trenchant critique at what he calls Weberian sources of legitimacy, treating my view as a distinctive variation on the Weberian account. I am not sure that the issues on which we differ are most economically framed by (...) drawing Weber so prominently into the debate. Since Cross has already framed the issues in this way, however, I think I can best contribute to the exchange by accepting his terms of reference wherever appropriate and trying to work as fruitfully as possible within them. I will respectfully not take up any of the issues raised in the fourth section of the article, because Cross's use of the notion of civic agency there is so far removed from mine as to leave little room for productive engagement.As Cross notes, Weber identifies three distinct sources of legitimacy (or three types of authority): legality, the traditional, and the charismatic. This, however, is only a typology of specific sources and an incomplete one at that, for it does not cover the two sources that I happen to find most relevant in Democracy in China.1 The teleological legitimacy much discussed in chapter 1 of my book does not come under any of Weber's ideal types and seems to constitute another, distinct ideal type. Nor is the democratic legitimacy based on popular sovereignty that is proposed in chapter 3 as an alternative to teleological legitimacy quite the same as legal authority. It is thus easy to see that—and why—I do not avail myself of what Cross calls the Weberian sources of legitimacy. As a matter of fact, I do not [End Page 149] regard Weber's tripartite classification, regardless of whether it is exhaustive, as the conceptual core of his idea of legitimacy.Cross moves closer to that core when he notes the difference between the type of motive (i.e., non-expedient) that the three Weberian sources of legitimacy are supposed to have in common and the motive of pure expediency. This difference is important because, as Weber puts it in a well-known statement quoted by Cross, "Purely material interests and calculations of advantages as the basis of solidarity between the chief and his administrative staff result, in this as in other connexions, in a relatively unstable situation." Based on Weber's concern with the lack of stability characteristic of relations of pure expediency, Cross is then able to speak of a "Weber-inspired rejection of performance legitimacy." This conclusion, if not exactly mistaken, is nevertheless reached without adequately bringing out the issues involved.Take a close look at the passage in Economy and Society from which the above quote is taken:Purely material interests and calculations of advantages as the basis of solidarity between the chief and his administrative staff result, in this as in other connexions, in a relatively unstable situation. Normally other elements, affectual and ideal, supplement such interests. In certain exceptional cases the former alone may be decisive. In everyday life these relationships, like others, are governed by custom and material calculation of advantage. But custom, personal advantage, and purely affectual or ideal motives of solidarity do not form a sufficiently reliable basis for a given domination. In addition there is normally a further element, the belief in legitimacy.2Here it becomes clear that Weber, even in emphasizing the indispensable role of belief in legitimacy, argues his case much more cautiously and subtly than Cross gives one to understand. To begin with we see Weber take the trouble to stress "purely." We then find three qualifications in a row before Weber allows himself to conclude, as an empirical observation, that "custom, personal advantage, purely affectual or ideal motives of solidarity, do not form a sufficiently reliable basis for a given domination," from which he is apparently compelled to draw the inference that "there is normally a further element, the belief in legitimacy." In an earlier section of Economy and Society Weber makes similar allowances for the empirical proximity of motives... (shrink)

I am extremely grateful to the three commentators for their instructive and challenging criticisms and for giving me the opportunity to make my position more plausible and, where it is bound to remain controversial, clearer than it is in my book.1 In doing so, I will sometimes be concerned simply to clear up what I consider to be misunderstandings on the part of my commentators, in full awareness that my own lack of clarity or emphasis may well have contributed to (...) them. This I take to be worthwhile in its own right, but especially for the sake of locating more precisely the issues where real disagreement exists and facilitating useful engagement on these issues. As the line between these tasks is seldom sharp... (shrink)

Sociological system in accordance with modern times.

In this article, the views of Yusuf al-Qaradawi (d. 2022) on the change of the fatwa are discussed. Other issues of the fatwa method are generally excluded from the scope. At the point of solving new problems, the change of the fatwa is important. The aim of the study is to reveal al-Qaradawi's contribution to the issue of changing the fatwa. In this study, in which the qualitative research method was used, thematic reading was made. As it is known, scholars (...) have adopted the idea that the provisions open to ijtihad can be changed. According to al-Qaradawi, there is even a consensus on this. Likewise, there is a consensus that the final provisions are not subject to change. al-Qaradawi mentioned that independent ijtihad activities should continue. Because only in this way can fiqh remain alive and dynamic. Therefore, it can solve new problems. Therefore, the idea that the door of ijtihad is closed cannot be accepted. On the other hand, scholars should take into account the ancient jurisprudence. It should contribute to this information by adding or correcting it. The principles that allow the change of the fatwa are four in the form of time, place, situation and custom. al-Qaradawi stated that he added six new elements to these. These are as follows: The change of information, the change of people's needs, the change of people's power and possibilities, umumu'l-balwa, the change of social, economic and political conditions, the change of opinion and idea. The author has reached these six elements as a result of a deep research. Muftis should take these factors into consideration when issuing a fatwa. Because the maslahah of the servants and the principle of convenience require this. (shrink)