Closing a legal debate is a distinct performance, not discursive failure

Evidence

One of the many merits of Johansen’s account of classical Islamic law is his demonstration that the shari¯‘a is a field of debate and dissent in which the distinction between certainty and probability is pivotal, and that this law has evolved in the context of changing social circumstances and arguments. But just as important is his implicit suggestion that the authoritative closure of a debate is not necessarily a sign of discursive failure, that it indicates a different kind of discursive performance altogether—the carrying out of legal judgment. — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 1231

Categorization

• XREF: Reframes the Islam-vs-West ‘closed vs open’ discourse contrast; useful against the common caricature of sharia as frozen text. — connects to: Closing a conversation is always a personal decision, not procedure — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 348