The fundamental way in which modern civilization strains the human being lies in an understanding of individualization that severs people from their surroundings and from the meaningful relationships they form with others. Within this framework, the human being is imagined as a creature worn down through contact with others, whose freedom is increasingly constrained as their engagement with the public sphere expands. Muslims' civilizational outlook, however, rests on the exact opposite premise. A person grows, matures and reaches fulfillment only within meaningful, responsibility-laden and enduring relationships established with others. The very possibility of being human emerges through living together with others and through the shared practice of multiplying what is good. Accordingly, what is ultimately expected from such a society is that the human being attains the possibility of moral and existential perfection. In this way, “each individual, together with other individuals, becomes the bearer of a form of perfection that transcends them and is realized within the order of their relationships.”
In Islamic civilization, efforts aimed at self-improvement are consistently encouraged. However, this inner struggle is expected to be reflected in the external world, in social and communal life. The most striking expression of this perspective is found in the Prophet Muhammad’s saying: “When a person dies, the reward for all of his deeds comes to an end except for three: ongoing charity, beneficial knowledge from which others continue to benefit, and a righteous child who prays for him.”
It is crucial to recognize that these three domains, which may at first appear individual in nature, in fact possess an entirely public dimension. Such forms of good enable a person to continue living within the public sphere even after death. Ongoing charity refers to acts of goodness that remain open to collective use. Moreover, structures such as mosques, schools, roads, fountains and soup kitchens are not merely physical spaces that improve the public realm; they also constitute the moral and cultural backbone that sustains social life.
Beneficial knowledge, in a similar manner, corresponds less to an individual achievement than to a public responsibility. Knowledge from which others benefit serves a function that is advantageous to humanity, provides direction to society and the future, and thus generates public good. The strengthening of the public sphere through knowledge, by means of scholarly works and the individuals who are educated and formed through it, ultimately enables the cultivation of virtue at the individual level while also contributing to the production of collective welfare at the societal level. A righteous child, meanwhile, is not merely someone who fulfills duties toward his or her parents, but a person who contributes to the cultural environment in which they were raised and who strives to promote the spread of goodness and the prevention of harm within the public sphere. In other words, a righteous child embodies a character shaped by a sense of public responsibility and a genuine concern for improving the lives of others.
When these three domains are considered together, it becomes clear that what renders a person enduring is the contribution they make to the public sphere. Accordingly, in Islam's civilizational tradition, a person attains fulfillment not merely by purifying the inner self but by carrying this purification and refinement into the external world, into social life. In other words, the human being is not invited to withdraw from the public sphere, but rather is continually called to beautify and improve it. For this reason, active participation in public life and the strengthening of the public sphere along the axis of goodness and beauty occupy not a secondary but a central position in Islamic civilization. Within this framework, the Prophet Muhammad’s saying, “The best of people are those who are most beneficial to others,” as well as the saying, “Gabriel continued to urge me to treat my neighbor well, to the point that I thought he would make the neighbor an heir,” constitute powerful calls regarding human obligations within the public sphere.
Similarly, the principle of “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is wrong” can be understood as a form of public responsibility and a practice of being human together. Grounded in the strong emphasis that a person can attain moral and existential fulfillment only through responsibility-laden relationships with others, enjoining good expands in meaning as an obligation to construct, strengthen, and sustain the public sphere in ways that generate goodness. In this sense, enjoining good reinforces the effort to cultivate a social climate in which what is good becomes practicable, sustainable and attractive. It removes goodness from being a burdensome act of sacrifice and instead situates it within the natural flow of everyday life. The emphasis on ongoing charity, beneficial knowledge, and a righteous child clearly illustrates how this principle can be concretely realized. In the same way, forbidding wrong is a call directed toward the public sphere, aimed at eliminating the structures, neglect, and indifference that produce harm. In short, this principle is a call to collectively build a social fabric in which the paths leading to goodness are open, accessible, and supportive, while the paths leading to wrongdoing are arduous, costly and discouraging.
In Western civilization, in contrast, neighborhood life, local communities, shared spaces and collective responsibilities have gradually receded, while the private sphere has been sacralized. In this process, the public sphere ceases to function as a ground that cultivates human maturity and is instead (re)cast as a domain of interference that disrupts individual comfort. Under such conditions, encountering the other becomes not an opportunity but a burden to be endured. Against the view that contact with others constrains freedom, the Islamic perspective holds that the other is a prerequisite for human fulfillment. For this reason, enjoining good also entails building networks of relationships through which goodness becomes possible together with others, while the call to forbid wrong reflects the will to keep the public sphere alive in the face of competitive, isolating and responsibility-evading practices that turn the other into a form of hell.
Digital platform culture further deepens this mindset. Algorithms confine individuals to closed echo chambers populated by those who are similar to themselves. The difference is perceived as disturbing and threatening. The public sphere ceases to be a space that requires face-to-face responsibility and is reduced instead to digital forms of contact that can be easily abandoned, blocked or silenced. As a result, the other is no longer a counterpart with whom one must live together, but becomes a form of noise that can be effortlessly erased. Consequently, on digital platforms, anger, mob shaming, public exposure, mockery, polarization and extremism are algorithmically rewarded, while moderation, compassion, patience and responsibility are rendered invisible.
Moreover, on digital platforms, access to wrongdoing is extremely low-cost. Insulting others, engaging in exposure or shaming, spreading falsehoods, producing manipulative content, or objectifying others are all possible with a single click. Furthermore, such behaviors often carry little to no cost, as anonymity, distance and the diffusion of responsibility shield individuals from consequences. In contrast, goodness in digital environments is frequently labor-intensive, unrewarded and algorithmically devalued. The sense of shame, propriety, contextual awareness and responsibility that restrain individuals in face-to-face interactions largely dissolves in digital settings, rendering wrongdoing not only easier but also more invisible and more socially legitimized.
In sum, within Islamic civilizational tradition, the other is a gateway to paradise. A person is tested, matures and finds meaning through the relationships they establish with others. What places strain on humanity within Western civilization, in contrast, is the frequent permeation of the idea that the other is a form of hell into everyday behavior. Centered on competition, distrust and loneliness, this approach views the public sphere as a burden and a threat. The crisis that Western civilization has produced on a global scale in this regard represents the contemporary return – manifesting as loneliness, loss of meaning, and public decay – of a long historical trajectory that has turned the other into hell. Digital platforms are powerful mediators of this process. By contrast, in the Islamic civilizational outlook, the public sphere constitutes the primary ground through which human beings realize themselves, multiply goodness, and continue to live on even after death. Accordingly, in Islamic civilization, the other is a necessary condition for human fulfillment.
