文章基本信息

标题：A Critique of Akhtar’s Model of an Economic Economy
本地全文：下载
作者：Shujaat Ali Khan
期刊名称：American Journal of Islam and Society
印刷版ISSN：2690-3733
电子版ISSN：2690-3741
出版年度：1994
卷号：11
期号：4
DOI：10.35632/ajis.v11i4.2449
语种：English
出版社：International Institute of Islamic Thought
摘要：In an article entitled “Modelling the Economic Growth of an Islamic Economy,”l M. Ramazan Akhtar presented a mathematical model that subjects Allahs attributes to measurement and undermines the cause of the Islamization of knowledge, which he intended to serve. In his article, there are several flaws, mistakes, and inconsistencies that deserve comment and criticism. This paper has examined critically Akhtar’s model and found it to be neither informative nor predictive. Before presenting the critique, however, I would like to comment on some of the general weaknesses of the article. In the opening paragraph (p. 491), Akhtar says: “Growth depends on several factors, among them a consistent increase in the amount of physical goods and services produced over a given period of time. This is usually taken as an index of economic growth.” Although economic growth is defined and measured by the increase in the amount of goods and services produced over a given period of time, it does not imply that the former depends on the latter. There is no cause and effect relationship between the two. In his “Review of the Literature” (p. 492), Akhtar makes a general statement that Muslim economists use the terms “economic growth” and “economic development” interchangeably. The economic literature that has been produced since the early 1960s makes a clear distinction between these two terms and views economic growth as a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for economic development (Clower 1966). Most Muslim economists hold this mainstream view. If there are still some using the terms interchangeably, they are the exceptions. In the second paragraph on page 495, Akhtar gives an English translation of Qur’an 39:9. In fact, this is a translation of 41:10-a serious mistake and not a typographical error. The last paragraph on page 491 reads: “The hypothesis is examined theoretically because statistical data for empirical analysis is not available.” But at the end of this paragraph, he asserts: “Analytical results show that moral factors make a positive contribution to both income ...