ABSTRACT:This article examines the issue of gender equality within Islam in order to develop an ethical framework for businesses operating in Muslim majority countries. We pay attention to the role of women and seemingly inconsistent expectations of Islamic and Western societies with regard to appropriate gender roles. In particular, we contrast a mainstream Western liberal individualist view of freedom and equality—the capability approach, used here as an illustration of mainstream Western liberalism—with an egalitarian Islamic view on gender equality. While the (...) article identifies an opportunity for this particular approach to reform patriarchal interpretations and practices of Islam toward gender egalitarian interpretations and practices, it also contests the notions of adaptation and well-being inherent within the capability approach. We suggest that a dialectical approach to understanding the relationships among religion, culture, and business provides a better guide to responsible business action in Muslim Majority countries than does the capability approach. (shrink)

ABSTRACT:This article examines the issue of gender equality within Islam in order to develop an ethical framework for businesses operating in Muslim majority countries. We pay attention to the role of women and seemingly inconsistent expectations of Islamic and Western societies with regard to appropriate gender roles. In particular, we contrast a mainstream Western liberal individualist view of freedom and equality—the capability approach, used here as an illustration of mainstream Western liberalism—with an egalitarian Islamic view on gender equality. While the (...) article identifies an opportunity for this particular approach to reform patriarchal interpretations and practices of Islam toward gender egalitarian interpretations and practices, it also contests the notions of adaptation and well-being inherent within the capability approach. We suggest that a dialectical approach to understanding the relationships among religion, culture, and business provides a better guide to responsible business action in Muslim Majority countries than does the capability approach. (shrink)

The objective of this paper is to establish a theoretical foundation for food education in schools. Amartya Sen’s capability approach (CA), an ethical theory concerning the freedom required to achieve one’s well-being, was applied to define the previously unchallenged ethical nature of food education. The analyses were informed by foundational CA concepts, Sen’s own perspectives on ‘food’ and ‘education’, and CA-based education studies. Through these analyses, the fundamental nature of food education was defined as follows: ‘Capability to eat well’ is (...) the freedom to convert commodities (such as food or pocket money) into the ‘functionings to eat well’ that constitute children’s ‘well-eating’ (Definition 1); and the objective of food education as public policy is to expand such capability to eat well (Def. 2). However, if an appropriate pedagogy is not employed, children’s capability can be reduced (Def. 3); therefore, to avoid this, the pedagogy has to enable them to perceive more ‘associations’ (in a Deweyan sense) between related conversion factors (Def. 4), as well as to choose and participate in the educational process (Def. 5). This theory not only elucidated the ethical nature of food education but also expanded the scope of the application of the CA to food issues. (shrink)

In criticizing communitarian views of justice, Amartya Sen argues that identity is not merely a matter of discovery but an object of reasoned choice subject to constraints. Distinguishing three notions of identity – self-perception, perceived identity and social affiliation – I claim that the relevant constraints implied by this argument are minimal. Some of Sen's arguments about perceived identity and social context do not establish any further constraints. Sen also argues that a model of multiculturalism and some forms of education (...) can restrict, or fail to promote, reasoned and informed identity choice. This argument is better understood in the light of Sen's work on capability and justice, notably his concern with ways in which underdogs can adapt and his emphasis on public reasoning. It highlights limitations on information and opportunities for reasoning. I suggest that these lead to genuine constraints on (reasoned and informed) identity choice. The paper focuses on Sen's work, though its claims are also relevant to George Akerlof and Rachel Kranton's analysis of identity. (shrink)