Deepening Reds, Contrasting Blues, and Various PurplesCulture War? The Myth of a Polarized America, by FiorinaMorris P. with AbramsSamuel J. and PopeJeremy C.. New York, NY: Pearson Longman. 128 pp. $42.36 paper. ISBN: 0321366069.Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate, by LakoffGeorge. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing Co., 2004. 144 pp. $8.00 paper. ISBN: 1931498717.It Takes a Family: Conservativism and the Common Good, by SantorumRick. Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 2005. 464 pp. $25.00 cloth. ISBN: 1932236295.God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It, by WallisJim. New York, NY: Harper San Francisco. 416 pp. $25.95 cloth. ISBN: 0060558288.

2006 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 346-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dombrink
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Common Good ◽  
White River ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
White River Junction ◽  
The Right

Theology as Work: The Mandatum and the Rights of Labor

Horizons ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-134
Author(s):  
Patrick T. McCormick
Keyword(s):  
Academic Freedom ◽  
Working Conditions ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Catholic Social Teaching ◽  
Social Teaching ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Church ◽  
Safe Working

ABSTRACTMany oppose the mandatum as a threat to the academic freedom of Catholic scholars and the autonomy and credibility of Catholic universities. But the imposition of this juridical bond on working theologians is also in tension with Catholic Social Teaching on the rights and dignity of labor. Work is the labor necessary to earn our daily bread. But it is also the vocation by which we realize ourselves as persons and the profession through which we contribute to the common good. Thus, along with the right to a just wage and safe working conditions, Catholic Social Teaching defends workers' rights to a full partnership in the enterprise, and calls upon the church to be a model of participation and cooperation. The imposition of the mandatum fails to live up to this standard and threatens the jobs and vocations of theologians while undermining this profession's contribution to the church.

Aristotle

2020 ◽  
pp. 34-50
Author(s):  
Terence Irwin
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Detailed Account ◽  
Virtuous Person ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Rational Part ◽  
Human Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

Aristotle agrees with Plato that virtue requires the cooperation of the rational and the non-rational parts of the soul, and that the virtuous person is always better off than the non-virtuous, even though virtue alone is not sufficient for happiness. To strengthen Plato’s argument for this claim, he offers a more detailed account of the nature of happiness, and of the relation between virtue and happiness. Since happiness is the supreme human good, it should be identified with rational activity in accordance with virtue in a complete life, in which external circumstances are favourable. A virtue of character is the appropriate agreement between the rational and the non-rational parts of the soul, aiming at fine action (i.e., action that promotes the common good). This requirement of appropriate agreement distinguishes virtue from continence (mere control of the rational over the non-rational part). To show that a life of virtue, so defined, promotes the agent’s happiness, Aristotle argues that one’s own happiness requires the right kind of friendship with others, in which one aims at the good of others for their own sake.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document