Neo-Aristotelian Ethical Naturalism

Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Frey
Keyword(s):  
2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-53 ◽  
Author(s):  

AbstractThe history of ethics contains many moral faculty theories, which usually are sorted by their metaphysics. The usual suspects include moral rationalism (Richard Price, Kant), moral sentiment theory (Hutcheson, Hume, Smith) and the varieties of ethical naturalism. Moral faculty theories differ importantly upon yet another dimension, on how widely it is distributed. Some, the Platonic elitists (Plato, J.S. Mill, R.M. Hare), suppose that moral truth can be discerned only by philosophical argument. Hence, they ascribe a revisionary task to normative theory, that of correcting nonphilosophers' moral errors. Others, the communalists (Aquinas, Hume, W.D. Ross), hold that the moral faculty is universally distributed. Hence, they hold that normative theory's task is not to revise, but rather to discern and explain the shared moral conception that we all apply in our ordinary moral lives. I here offer arguments to support commonalism.


1967 ◽  
Vol 64 (23) ◽  
pp. 779 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. W. Sumner
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 217-234
Author(s):  
Mário Maximo

Despite its origins within moral philosophy, economists think their science has nothing to do with the good. They appeal to some kind of Hume’s guillotine that divides the descriptive and the normative. With that in hand, they affirm the solely descriptive aspect of their discipline. I argue this is not the case. Economists have, as they need to, an all encompassing notion of the good. I suggest going back to Aristotelian arguments to show the shortcomings of this good of economists. Aristotle is helpful because of his analysis of chrematistics and the real function of money. Hence, the loosely utilitarian good of the economists is confronted with a robust sense of the good and the human form. The capability approach is the first to identify these weak points on economic theory and to propose a sort of Aristotelian comeback. However, I claim the capabilities approach itself doesn’t follow the Aristotelian arguments used to attack economists to its necessary conclusion. Therefore, I suggest that the recent advances in neo-Aristotelian ethical naturalism can be used to reformulate economics by dispossessing economists of their sumo bonnun.


2020 ◽  
pp. 139-182
Author(s):  
Chad Hansen
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Alan L. Mittleman

This chapter explores the connection between holiness and ethics or between holiness and goodness. Drawing on a theory of holiness in Judaism, it considers how holiness relates to other values, including moral ones, and whether holiness is more primordial or primitive than ethics. The discussion is anchored on two texts: the first from the Book of Leviticus, and the second from the modern Jewish thinker, Abraham Joshua Heschel. The chapter argues that holiness and morality are equally primordial, equally original to the human condition, and goes on to propose a natural history of holiness in which the human experiences of love and awe, of goodness and holiness arise together against man's evolutionary background as a social primate. It also examines the concepts of primordial morality, natural morality, ethical naturalism, and moral realism before concluding with an analysis of intuition in relation to the good, the right, and the holy.


2018 ◽  
pp. 324-344
Author(s):  
Jeremy Randel Koons
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document