Jamie Sutton
I am a Marine Corps veteran who studies constitutional law, the intersection of law and religion, and the influences of religion on politics and the public sphere. I have particular interests in Islamic and Middle East Studies, and pursue active and issues based scholarship. I believe the primary obligation of the academic is service to the community and to the public, educating and recommending action.
Supervisors: Baruch Halpern
Address: Athens, Georgia, United States
Supervisors: Baruch Halpern
Address: Athens, Georgia, United States
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (12)
Uploads
Papers by Jamie Sutton
This paper will examine the history and methods of the Muslim Brotherhood (Al-Ikhwan) political party in Egypt from its origins in the late 1920's to modern day. The stated political goals and the historical actions of the Brotherhood will be analyzed in conjunction with a comparison against the repeated accusations of terrorist methods and ideologies which have been made by the official Egyptian government over the years. Research will show that while neither the leadership nor the regular members of the organization have been monolithic in aim, the party has demonstrated a repeated and firm commitment to the democratic process and working within the system rather than attacking it from the outside. A common mistake in political analysis by Americans is to assume that Islamic Revivalist forces in the region of North Africa and the Middle East are united in goal and methods. The history of the Muslim Brotherhood on the other hand shows that some revivalists might in fact be capable of being allies of the United States in supporting democratic movements in the region. Continuing forward, a greater nuance of rhetoric and differentiation between violent and non-violent Islamist factions is needed to ensure foreign policy success.
Throughout the history of the Abrahamic faiths there has been a tension over the guardianship of the Scriptural traditions within each faith. This tension has been characterized by deep debate between traditionalists who prefer the most literal interpretations to be found in the text of scripture, and a more liberal or rationalist view which seeks to find esoteric meanings and is content to reinterpret scripture to fit the context of the times. A close examination of the philosophical and cognitive issues at play in the reading of texts reveals that a personal and experiential interpretation of Scriptures can not be avoided, when we read holy texts we always do so in a way conditioned by our culture, our beliefs, and our lives. Because of the back and forth relationship that language has with thought, and the metaphorical construct which unconsciously informs most of our beliefs, it is unavoidable that all readings of scripture are personal readings. This means that the difference between the two sides of the debate is not one of method, but of self-awareness. The productive way forward in issues of Scripture then is not to avoid our prejudices, but rather to be aware of how they affect our thought process and channel our understandings in ways that are productive for society.
Keywords: Scripture, Religion, Hermeneutics, Philosophy
Since the beginning of the American “war on terror” the permissible targets and methods of warfare within Islamic theology continues to be the subject of much discourse for a global audience. An examination of sources illuminates rich traditions of regulation applying to warfare in Islamic jurisprudence. These traditions range from distinction of legitimate targets to the proportionality of destruction, and taken as a totality they represent a demonstration of concern for the principles of Just War theory many decades before a codified western tradition of such began.
This essay offers a concise introduction to the classical regulations on warfare within Islamic jurisprudence along with their place in the modern context. While not an exhaustive effort, the paper offers an understanding of what these Islamic limitations on violence are and how they are circumvented in the modern context by extremists.
This paper will examine the history and methods of the Muslim Brotherhood (Al-Ikhwan) political party in Egypt from its origins in the late 1920's to modern day. The stated political goals and the historical actions of the Brotherhood will be analyzed in conjunction with a comparison against the repeated accusations of terrorist methods and ideologies which have been made by the official Egyptian government over the years. Research will show that while neither the leadership nor the regular members of the organization have been monolithic in aim, the party has demonstrated a repeated and firm commitment to the democratic process and working within the system rather than attacking it from the outside. A common mistake in political analysis by Americans is to assume that Islamic Revivalist forces in the region of North Africa and the Middle East are united in goal and methods. The history of the Muslim Brotherhood on the other hand shows that some revivalists might in fact be capable of being allies of the United States in supporting democratic movements in the region. Continuing forward, a greater nuance of rhetoric and differentiation between violent and non-violent Islamist factions is needed to ensure foreign policy success.
Throughout the history of the Abrahamic faiths there has been a tension over the guardianship of the Scriptural traditions within each faith. This tension has been characterized by deep debate between traditionalists who prefer the most literal interpretations to be found in the text of scripture, and a more liberal or rationalist view which seeks to find esoteric meanings and is content to reinterpret scripture to fit the context of the times. A close examination of the philosophical and cognitive issues at play in the reading of texts reveals that a personal and experiential interpretation of Scriptures can not be avoided, when we read holy texts we always do so in a way conditioned by our culture, our beliefs, and our lives. Because of the back and forth relationship that language has with thought, and the metaphorical construct which unconsciously informs most of our beliefs, it is unavoidable that all readings of scripture are personal readings. This means that the difference between the two sides of the debate is not one of method, but of self-awareness. The productive way forward in issues of Scripture then is not to avoid our prejudices, but rather to be aware of how they affect our thought process and channel our understandings in ways that are productive for society.
Keywords: Scripture, Religion, Hermeneutics, Philosophy
Since the beginning of the American “war on terror” the permissible targets and methods of warfare within Islamic theology continues to be the subject of much discourse for a global audience. An examination of sources illuminates rich traditions of regulation applying to warfare in Islamic jurisprudence. These traditions range from distinction of legitimate targets to the proportionality of destruction, and taken as a totality they represent a demonstration of concern for the principles of Just War theory many decades before a codified western tradition of such began.
This essay offers a concise introduction to the classical regulations on warfare within Islamic jurisprudence along with their place in the modern context. While not an exhaustive effort, the paper offers an understanding of what these Islamic limitations on violence are and how they are circumvented in the modern context by extremists.