🎓
Academic Evaluation
This article offers a foundational treatment of one of the deepest crises rooted in the history of human systems: the crisis of viewing the human being as a means rather than an end. Its research significance stems from its ability to combine historical-analytical reading with a methodological alternative based on Existential Rights, positioning it at the core of the Foundational–Takamolya Project.
The article is distinguished by several points:
1- Analytical Approach
Links patterns of domination across eras (political, economic, religious) as a continuation of a single foundational logic, rather than as isolated events.
Employs a structural analysis of systems, highlighting that the flaw lies not in individuals or classes but in the governing foundation that determines the human’s position within the system.
2- Foundational Perspective
Redefines the value of the human being through “Existential Rights” as the organizing principle of systems, transcending cultural or doctrinal biases.
Proposes the solution in redistributing roles and tasks within a balanced functional framework, rather than dismantling structures or abolishing authority altogether.
3- Scientific Contribution
Establishes a practical concept applicable in international politics, governance, and institutional reform by replacing the logic of domination with the logic of functional balance.
Opens the door for comparative studies between modern systems and historical unifying (tawḥīdī) visions in their treatment of the human being as an end in itself.
Academic Conclusion
The article does not merely describe the crisis but provides a foundational approach that can be applied to reform knowledge and organizational systems. This makes it a valuable contribution to the field of foundational studies and qualifies it to serve as a primary reference for any research on rebuilding systems on the basis of Existential Rights.
Problem Statement
Despite remarkable advances in science, technology, and governance across the ages, one fundamental problem continues to resurface in every civilizational model: the absence of genuine recognition of the human being as an end in themselves, rather than as a means to serve the system. This crisis is neither accidental nor exclusive to a particular era; it is deeply embedded in the logic by which systems have viewed the human being from the dawn of history, through religious, political, and economic frameworks, up to the modern age.
Keywords
Human Value – Existential Rights – Domination – System Development – Redistribution of Roles – Justice – Decision-Maker – Cognitive Systems – Foundationalism – Integrativism.
Main text
The crisis begins with the very perspective through which systems view the human being.
In ancient times, women were counted as less than men, and individuals were mere cogs in the machine of empire, state, or religious institution.
With the rise of modernity and the slogan “the individual first,” the majority still remained excluded from this declared privilege.
They became numbers in policies, fuel for the economy, and resources for wars… while decisive choices were made about them, not with them.
The issue goes beyond politics or economics.
Even some religious visions confined value to a particular group, stripping others of recognition or care.
Thus, names and facades may change, but the logic remains the same: domination shifts hands (nobles, clergy, military, politicians), while the structural flaw endures.
The solution does not lie in toppling classes or demolishing structures, but in reconfiguring the system itself.
Redistributing tasks and roles among all actors—based on the essential rights tied to the human’s existential function (what we call existential rights in our project) [(see article: From Existential Rights to System Design)]—beyond any logic of possession, and in a way that secures fair balance between individual and collective interests.
This is not a utopian novelty but an extension of what the prophets of tawḥīd and pioneers of justice in history called for: liberating the human from all forms of domination and restoring them to their original function in existence.
Modern intellectual and political movements, though raising the banner of rights, often maintained the same founding logic that places individuals under the guardianship of new forms of influence.
Adopting this perspective allows international institutions, decision-makers, and intellectual elites to play their natural role in preserving balance and enabling genuine human development—without turning these roles into ideological tools or instruments of domination.
conclusion
Overcoming the crisis of human value is not achieved by changing facades but by changing the organizing logic that directs systems.
Without adopting a new cognitive framework [(see: Takamolya Wisdom: Rebuilding the Mind Towards a Functional Vision of Existence)], one that acknowledges existential rights as the foundation of organization, domination will continue to reproduce itself in every new form.
This is not a call for blind revolution, but for radical reform in the foundations upon which authority, knowledge, and organization are built.
References
- Mahfouz, Jalal (2024). Best Option: The Takamolya Project (Critical Existentialism) – Introductory Chapter and Conclusion.
- Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish.
- Jürgen Habermas, Religion in the Public Sphere.
- Charles Taylor, A Secular Age.
- Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political.
- Friedrich Nietzsche, The Will to Power.
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice.
- Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom.
- Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations.
- David Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation.
