Abstract
This article examines the contribution of one Islamic scholar, Fetullah Gülen to the debate about the meaning and practice of responsibility. It analyses Gülen’s thinking in terms of three inter-connected modes of responsibility: relational accountability (the framework for responsibility), moral agency (teleological, virtue focused and action centred) and liability. This view of responsibility is contrasted with major western philosophers such as Levinas, Buber and Jonas, Islamic tradition and the major views about corporate responsibility, including stakeholder theory. The role of dialogue in embodying the three modes of responsibility is then analysed. The social responsibility practice of business leaders who are part of Gülen’s Hizmet Movement is briefly surveyed to illustrate the embodiment of responsibility. This focuses on the contribution of business to education and peace building, and includes the example of Zaman Daily.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/amodernottoman/. Whilst influenced by the Sufi tradition, the movement is not a Sufi order. The classical tariqa Sufism would require initiation, and involve esoteric religious practices and arcane terminology (Çetin 2007, p. 382). This is the opposite of a movement which aims for transparency and communication through action. Gulay (2007) notes that Gülen also goes against the traditionalist Sufi paradigm by playing down the role of a Sufi master as mediator between the disciples and God. Gülen sees himself as an inspirational leader, but claims no formal authority, preferring to call title the movement Hizmet (service), pointing to the infinite wisdom of the Qur’an, and the many different ways of accessing that (Gulay 2007, p. 57).
The nature of this accountability is reinforced by Jonas’s negative view of technological man and the underlying ‘heuristics of fear’ (1984, p 27), in other words, the danger of technology destroying the environment. This, however, is not the basis of the accountability, only a ‘very useful first word’ (ibid.) which focuses the mind. In contrast, for Gülen, science and technology are means of responding to God’s call.
A key virtue related to intentionality for Gülen is ikhlas, purity of heart, avoiding motivation based in individual reward, derived from Nursi’s writings (Michel 2005).
This suggests that Gülen distinguishes pre-determinism and divine foreknowledge. God has foreknowledge of what we will do but still, in time, relates to us directly. There is not space to deal with this in detail here. However, it is not clear that Gülen resolves a major tension here. For instance, if God already knows how we will make decisions how can his relationship of love, which urges us to respond, be authentic? Can love actually be genuine if the lover already knows the outcome of the relationship? For the most part, however, Gülen (2000) simply stresses the ongoing relationship of love which sustains and challenges humankind.
For Bauman, like Levinas (1989), this is partly inevitable, because the of the incommensurability of the other. Hence, the responsible person always has to discover the right response in and through the relationship. For Gülen the other is firstly God. This partly creates the impetus to always find what the next project is.
Though Gülen’s universal responsibility is centred in hope.
Nonetheless, responsibility for unintended consequences acts as strong motivation a continued renewal of consciousness of the social and physical environments.
Finch and Mason (1993) suggest that negotiation of responsibility is critical to the development of responsibility and even ethical identity.
This is precisely why Jesus exhorts his followers not restrict forgiveness to a prescribed 7 or even 70 times 7 (Matthew 18:22). The point of this saying is that once you have exhausted the rule, to forgive seven times, you still have to be responsible for the other.
Hence Gülen’s capacity to relate to an existentialist position whilst also critiquing the underlying philosophy.
It might be argued that just as Bauman argues for aporia at the centre of ethics Gülen sets up a parallel series of values and principles which cannot be simplistically assimilated. The only way to work through tradition and universal principles is precisely through dialogue and action.
Research being carried by the author into the understanding and practice of responsiblity in the Hizmet Movement.
Many viewed themselves as stakeholders in creation.
Several Turkish businessmen focused on Gülen’s idea of concentric circles of responsibility (1991, derived from Nursi). These noted different levels of obligation, from that owed to God to that owed to the world. Importantly, though all had to be recognised and responded to in appropriate action.
I am grateful Kerim Balci formerly of the Turkish Review and now Zaman, who shared these with me on a research trip to Istanbul in May 2013.
The authenticity of such dialogue was tested by the 2010 incident where a flotilla of ships tried to break the Gaza Blockade to provide aid to the Palestinians (supported by Zaman Daily), leading to conflict and several deaths. Gülen himself unusually made a public comment on this, arguing it was misguided (Lauria 2010). The result was dialogue between Zaman Daily and Gülen himself at several levels, reflecting also a wider dialogue between Turkish Muslim NGOs involved in the flotilla and Gülen.
In this sense Gülen extends King’s call to see stakeholder involvement as key to co-regulation of governance (King 2009).
References
Alexander, J. (2008). Capabilities and Social Justice. Ashgate: Aldershot.
Aquinas, T. (1981). Summa theologica. New York: Resources for Christian Living.
Arendt, H. (1991). Organized guilt and universal responsibility. In L. May & Hoffman (Eds.), Collective responsibility: Five decades of debate in theoretical and applied ethics (pp. 273–283). Rowbottom: Savage.
Argandona, A. (2012). Three ethical dimensions of the financial crisis. IESE Business School, Working Paper.
Aristotle, (1969). Nicomachean ethics. London: Penguin.
Bauman, Z. (1989). Modernity and the holocaust. London: Polity.
Beekun, R., & Badawi, J. (2005). Balancing ethical responsibility among multiple organizational stakeholders: The Islamic perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 60, 131–145.
Berlin, I. (1969). Two concepts of liberty. In A. Quinton (Ed.), Political philosophy. London: Penguin.
Brown, M. (2005). Corporate integrity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buber, M. (1942). I and thou. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clarke.
Callender, J. (2010). Free will and responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carroll, B. (2007). A dialogue of civilizations. Istanbul: The Gülen Institute.
Çetin, M. (2007). The Gülen movement: İts nature and identity. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), Muslim world in transition: Contributions of the Gülen movement (pp. 377–390). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Crotty J., Epstein G. 2008. Proposals for effectivly reguating the US fınancial system to avoid yet another meltdown. Unıversıty of Massachusetts, Amhurst MA, Department of Economics, Working Paper 15.
Dostoevsky, F. (1993). The grand ınquisitor. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Eldridge, B. (2007). The place of the Gulen movement in the ıntellectual history of Islam. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), Muslim world in transition: Contributions of the Gülen movement (pp. 526–538). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Entine, J. (2002). Shell, greenpeace and brent spar: The politics of dialogue. In C. Megone & S. Robinson (Eds.), Case histories in business ethics (pp. 59–95). London: Routledge.
Esposito, J., & Yilmaz, I. (2010). Gülen’s ideas on freedom of thoughts, pluralism, secularism, state, politics, civil society and democracy. In J. Esposito & I. Yilmaz (Eds.), Islam and peacebuilding: Gülen movement ınitiatives (pp. 25–38). New York: Blue Dome.
Finch, J., & Mason, J. (1993). Negotiating family responsibilities. London: Routledge.
Friedman, M. (1983). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In T. Donaldson & P. Weherne (Eds.), Ethical issues in business. New York: Prentice Hall.
Graskemper, M. (2007). A bridge to ınterreligious cooperation: The Gulen-Jesuits educational nexus. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), Muslim world in transition: Contributions of the gülen movement (pp. 622–631). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Gregg, S., & Stoner, J. (2009). Profit, prudence and virtue. Exeter: Imprint Academic.
Grinell, K. (2010). Border thinking: Fethullah Gülen and the east west divide. In J. Esposito & I. Yilmaz (Eds.), Islam and peacebuilding: Gülen movement ınitiatives (pp. 65–84). New York: Blue Dome.
Gulay, E. (2007). The Gulen phenomenon: A neo-sufi challenge to Turkey’s rival elite? Critical Middle Eastern Studies, 16(1), 37–61.
Gulen, F. (2011). The truth, rights and more. Fountain Magazine, 82, 3–5.
Gülen, F. 1990. Fethullah Gülen ANNE BABA HAKKI 110 dk. Izmir. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MJZMihUuAk&feature=youtube_gdata_player. Retrieved March 23, 2013.
Gülen, M.F. (1990) Murakabe ve Muhasebe (Introspection and Self-Interrogation) [CD-ROM].
Gülen, F. (1995). Prophet Muhammad: Aspects of his life, vol. 1. Fairfax: The Fountain.
Gülen, F. (1999). Key concepts in the practice of sufism, vol. 1. Fairfax: The Fountain.
Gülen, F. (2000). Essentials of Islamic faith. Fairfax: The Fountain.
Gülen, F. (2002). Essays, perspectives, opinions. Rutherford, NJ: The Light.
Gülen, F. (2004a). Towards a global civilization of love and tolerance. New Jersey: The Light.
Gülen, F. (2004b). A brief overview of Islam. Fairfax: The Fountain.
Gülen, F. (2005). The statue of our souls. New Jersey: The Light.
Gülen, F. (2006). Key concepts in the practice of sufism, vol. 1. New Jersey: The Light.
Gülen, F. (2009a). Key concepts in the practice of sufism, vol. 3. Istanbul: Tughra Books.
Gülen, F. (2009b). Kitap ve Sünnet Perspektifinde Kader. Istanbul: Nil Yalinyari.
Heath, J., & Norman, W. (2004). Stakeholder theory, corporate governance and public management. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(3), 247–265.
Huntington, S. (1998). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Touchstone.
Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Jonas, H. (2001). The phenomenon of life: Toward a philosophical biology. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Kalyoncu, M. (2010). Building civil society un ethno-religiously fractured communities. In I. Yilmaz & J. Esposito (Eds.), Islam and peacebuilding (pp. 273–290). New York: Blue Dome Press.
Keles, O. (2007). Promoting human rights values in the muslim world: The case of the Gülen movement. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), The muslim world in transition (pp. 683–708). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Khurana, R., & Nohria, N. (2008). It’s time to make management a true profession. Harvard Business Review, 86(10), 70–77.
King, I. I. I. (2009). IOD report on corporate governance. Johannesburg: IOD South Africa.
Kung, H. (1988). Chrıstıanıty and world religions: Dialogue with Islam. In L. Swidler (ed.), Towards a universal theology of relıgıon. New YOrk, NY: Orbis, Maryknoll.
Ladd, J. (1991). Bhopal: An essay on moral responsibility and civic virtue. Journal of Social Philosophy, 22, 73–91.
Lauria, J. (2010). Reclusive Turkish Imam criticizes Gaza Flotilla. Wall Street Journal, 32–33.
Lederach, J. P. (2005). The moral imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Levinas, E. (1989). Entre nous: On thinking-of-the-other. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lovelock, J. (1979). Gaia: A new look at life on earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maak, T. (2007). Responsible leadership, stakeholder engagement, and the emergence of social capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 329–343.
May, W. (1987). Code and covenant or philanthropy?. In S. Lammers, & A. Verhey, A. (eds.), On Moral Medicine (pp. 83–96). Eerdmans: Grand Rapids.
Michel, T. (2003). Fethullah Gülen as educator. In M. H. Yavuz & J. L. Esposito (Eds.), Turkish Islam and the secular state: The Gülen movement (pp. 69–84). Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
Michel, T. (2005). Sufism and modernity in the thought of Fetullah Gulen. The Muslim World, 95(3), 341–358.
Michel, T. (2008). Fighting poverty with Kimse Yok Mu?’ In Islam in the age of global challenges: Alternative perspectives of the Gülen movement conference proceedings (pp. 350–373). Washington (Rumi Forum, Washington DC): Georgetown University, November 14–15th.
Milgram, S. (2005). Obedience to authority. New York: Pinter and Martin.
Miller, R. T. (2009). Morals in a market bubble. University of Daytona Law Review, 351, 113–137.
Mohamed, Y. (2007). The educational theory of Fetullah Gülen and its practice in South Africa. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), The Muslim world in transition (pp. 552–571). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Moosa, E. (2003). The debts and burdens of critical Islam. In O. Saffi (Ed.), Progressive Muslims: On justice, gender and pluralism. Oxford: Oneworld.
Nasr, S. H. (2006). Standing before god: Human responsibilities and human rights. In W. Schweiker, K. Johnson, & M. Jung (Eds.), Humanity before god (pp. 209–237). Augsburg: Minneapolis.
Niebuhr, H. R. (1963). The responsible self. New York: Harper and Row.
Novak, M. (1990). Morality, capitalism and democracy. London: IEA.
Nursi, S. (1995). Isarat-ul Icaz. Istanbul: Envar Nesryat.
O’Neill, O. (2002). A question of trust: The BBC reith lectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Osman, M. (2007). Gülen’s contribution to a moderate Islam in South East Asia. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), The muslim world in transition (pp. 334–346). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Pesqueux, Y. (2012). On the topic of responsibility. Journal of Global Responsibility, 3(1), 19–31.
Pettit, P. (2007). Responsibility Incorporated. Ethics, 117, 171–201.
Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). The big idea: Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 1–17.
Pratt, D. (2010). Islamic prospects of interreligious dialogue. In I. Yilmaz & J. Esposito (Eds.), Islam and peacebuilding (pp. 189–206). New York: Blue Dome Press.
Rayment, J. J., & Smith, J. A. (2010). Misleadership. London: Gower.
Robinson, S. (2008). Spirituality, ethics and care. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Robinson, S. (2009). The nature of responsibility in a professional setting. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 11–19.
Robinson, S., & Dowson, P. (2012). Business ethics in practice. London: CIPD.
Robinson, S., & Smith, J. (2012). Exploring responsibility. Journal of Global Responsibility, 3(1), 151–167.
Robinson, S., & Smith, J. (2014). Co-charismatic leadership. Oxford: Peter Lang.
Saritoprak, Z. (2011). Fethullah Gülen’s theology of peacebuilding. In I. Yilmaz & J. Esposito (Eds.), Islam and peacebuilding (pp. 169–188). New York: Blue Dome Press.
Sartre, J.P. (2004). Existentialism. In Marino, G. (Ed.) Basic writings in existentialism (pp. 46–59). New York, NY: The Modern Library.
Schumpeter (2009). The pedagogy of the privileged. Economist pp. 68–69.
Shanks, M. (2012). Milgram revisited. Journal of Global Responsibility, 3(1), 66–83.
Sternberg, E. (2000). Just business. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Strawson, P. F. (1982). Freedom and resentment. In G. Watson (Ed.), Free will (pp. 59–80). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sun, W., Stewart, J., & Pollard, D. (Eds.) (2011). Reframing corporate social responsibility. Emerald: Bingley.
Tawney, R. H. (1930). Equality. London: Allen and Unwin.
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Titmuss, R. (1973). The gift relationship. London: Penguin.
Toguslu, E. (2007). Gülen’s theory of Adab and ethical values of the movement. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), The muslim world in transition (pp. 445–458). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Uygur, S. (2007). Islamic puritanism as a source of economic development: The case of the Gülen movement. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), The muslim world in transition (pp. 176–186). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Vahdat, F. (2002). God and the Juggernaut: Iran’s intellectual encounter with modernity. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
Vainoski-Mihai, I. (2010). Islamic resources for peacebuilding: Achievements and challenges. In I. Yilmaz & J. Esposito (Eds.), Islam and peacebuilding (pp. 85–102). New York: Blue Dome Press.
Vicini, F. (2007). Gülen’s rethinking of islamic pattern and it socio-political effects. In I. Yilmaz, et al. (Eds.), The muslim world in transition (pp. 430–444). Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University Press.
Visser, W. (2011). The age of responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the new DNA of business. London: John Wiley.
Werner, M. (2010). The immediacy of encounter and the dangers of dichotomy. In H. Tirosh-Samuelson & C. Wiese (Eds.), The legacy of Hans Jonas (pp. 203–230). Brill: Leiden.
Williams, G. (2008). Responsibility as a virtue. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 11(4), 455–470.
Yilmaz, I. (2002). Dynamic legal pluralism in England: The challenge of postmodern muslim legality to legal modernity. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 28(2), 343–354.
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The lucifer effect. London: Rider.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Robinson, S. Islam, Responsibility and Business in the Thought of Fethullah Gülen. J Bus Ethics 128, 369–381 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2101-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2101-3