scholarly journals Natural goodness and the political form of human life

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 565-592
Author(s):  
Jan Müller

Ethical Naturalism attempts to explain the objective normativity effective in human practices by reference to the relation between a living individual and the life-form it exhibits. This explanation falls short in the case of human beings (1) - not merely because of their essential rationality, but because the idea of normativity implicit in practice is dependent on the form of normativity?s being made explicit (2). I argue that this explicit form of normativity?s force and claim - the law in general - implies a tension between an explicit norm?s claim to absoluteness and the particularity of the situational case it is applied to. This tension may seem to produce an inherent violence corrupting the very idea of objective normativity inherent in the human form of life (3); in fact, it shows that the human form of life is essentially political. That the human form of life is essentially political does not contradict the idea of objective normativity - provided that this objectivity is not derived from a conception of ?natural goodness?, but rather from the actuality of human practice and its principle, justice (4).

2004 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 47-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Thompson

My immediate aim in this lecture is to contribute something to the apt characterization of our representation and knowledge of the specifically human life form, as I will put it—and, to some extent, of things ‘human’ more generally. In particular I want to argue against an exaggerated empiricism about such cognition. Meditation on these themes might be pursued as having a kind of interest of its own, an epistemological and in the end metaphysical interest, but my own purpose in the matter is practical-philosophical. I want to employ my theses to make room for a certain range of doctrines in ethical theory and the theory of practical rationality—doctrines, namely, of natural normativity or natural goodness, as we may call them. I am not proposing to attempt a positive argument for any such ‘neo-Aristotelian’ position, but merely to defend such views against certain familiar lines of objection; and even here my aims will be limited, as will be seen.


2020 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-391
Author(s):  
Gerson Reuter

Animalism is the view that we are primarily living beings of the species Homo sapiens. Being alive consists in the realization of biological processes. Accordingly, our conditions of existence and persistence have nothing to do with things like mental continuity. Hence, mental capabilities seem to be irrelevant to understanding the core of our nature as human beings. In recent years, the debate on animalism has focused on certain intractable ontological puzzles. However important these puzzles may be, they do not get to the heart of the widespread reluctance to accept animalism. One crucial reason lies in the fact that this view does not seem to respect our deeply entrenched understanding of ourselves as mental beings. The aim of my paper is thus to provide a stronger conception of the ontological relevance of our mental capabilities – without giving up the cen- tral claims of animalism. In particular, I discuss three proposals: first, the idea that being a human being involves the potential to develop mental capabilities; second, the idea that it is an essential feature of human beings to have a brain with the natural function of developing mental capabilities; and third, the idea that the ontological relevance of mental capabilities may emerge in the context of specifying something like the general human form of life.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  

Philosophy is a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means. It signifies a natural and necessary urge in human beings to know themselves and the world in which they live and move and have their being. Hindu philosophy is intensely spiritual and has always emphasized the need for practical realization of Truth. Philosophy is a comprehensive system of ideas about human nature and the nature of the reality we live in. It is a guide for living, because the issues it addresses are basic and pervasive, determining the course we take in life and how we treat other people. Hence we can say that all the aspects of human life are influenced and governed by the philosophical consideration. As a field of study philosophy is one of the oldest disciplines. It is considered as a mother of all the sciences. In fact it is at the root of all knowledge. Education has also drawn its material from different philosophical bases. Education, like philosophy is also closely related to human life. Therefore, being an important life activity education is also greatly influenced by philosophy. Various fields of philosophy like the political philosophy, social philosophy and economic philosophy have great influence on the various aspects of education like educational procedures, processes, policies, planning and its implementation, from both the theoretical and practical aspects. In order to understand the concept of Philosophy of education it is necessary to first understand the meaning of the two terms; Philosophy and Education.


2019 ◽  
pp. 13-30
Author(s):  
James R. Otteson

Chapter 1 addresses the central importance of asking the why of everything we propose to do, not only the how. This is as important in business as in any other walk of life. This issues from the fact that human beings are essentially purposive creatures, that is, creatures who create and pursue ends, goals, and purposes. The final or ultimate goal of human life is, as Aristotle argued, eudaimonia—“happiness,” “well-being,” or “flourishing.” If that is our ultimate end, then all our activities should be deliberately ordered to help us achieve it. That includes business, and the political and economic institutions in which business operates. This chapter argues that business should contribute to and reflect our pursuit of eudaimonia. It closes with questions that this conception of human purposiveness suggests should be investigated, pointing the path forward for the rest of the book.


Dialogue ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Woodcock

ABSTRACTMy aim in this article is to argue that Philippa Foot fails to provide a convincing basis for moral evaluation in her book Natural Goodness. Foot's proposal fails because her conception of natural goodness and defect in human beings either sanctions prescriptive claims that are clearly objectionable or else it inadvertently begs the question of what constitutes a good human life by tacitly appealing to an independent ethical standpoint to sanitize the theory's normative implications. Foot's appeal to natural facts about human goodness is in this way singled out as an Achilles' heel that undermines her attempt to establish an independent framework for virtue ethics. This problem might seem to be one that is uniquely applicable to the bold naturalism of Foot's methodology; however, I claim that the problem is indicative of a more general problem for all contemporary articulations of virtue ethics.


Human Affairs ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasil Gluchman

AbstractThis paper argues that the concept of dignity should be understood as a concept that we use to describe an aggregate of values and qualities of a person or thing that deserves esteem and respect. The primary value that creates the right to have dignity is life. The degree of dignity a life form has depends on its place in the evolutionary scale. Human beings are the highest form of life so they possess the highest degree of dignity.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 12
Author(s):  
Affiefa Liyaqat

Environment plays a very significant role in human civilization. Human beings have close relations with the biosphere in which they live. The whole environment and ecology consisting of earth, air, water, plants and animals provide the necessary and sufficient conditions for sustaining human life. The last few centuries have been dominated by human beings, and are referred to by some scholars as ‘anthropocene’, or a period of human domination over the planet. This domination has impacted the planet, leading to the rapid depletion of wildlife and their habitat. In the last few decades, growing human populations and their consumption levels, accompanied by greater need for water, electricity, metal, food, housing and other luxury items has led to the quick erosion of other species. This loss of species has been guesstimated by various scholars at anywhere between one per hour to one per day. Although human beings are considered the most intelligent life form on earth, they are responsible for most of the damage done to planet earth. Developing countries as well as developed countries alike are all suffering from environmental pollution. Therefore, today environmental problems have been the object of discussion everywhere from village to parliament.


2015 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID MCPHERSON

AbstractIn this article I seek to show the importance of spirituality for a neo-Aristotelian account of ‘the good life’. First, I lay out my account of spirituality. Second, I discuss why the issue of the place of spirituality in the good life has often either been ignored or explicitly excluded from consideration by neo-Aristotelians. I suggest that a lot turns on how one understands the ‘ethical naturalism’ to which neo-Aristotelians are committed. Finally, I argue that through a deeper exploration of the evaluative standpoint from within our human form of life as ‘meaning-seeking animals’ we can come to better appreciate the importance of spirituality for human beings throughout recorded history up to the present and why we can be described ashomo religiosus.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 148
Author(s):  
Elijah Okon John ◽  
Joseph Ajuluchukwu Uka

<p><em>Aristotle’s socio-political theory emphasizes the belief that human beings are naturally political. Aristotelian ideals that the political life of a free citizen is a sovereign state which provides for the well-being of the citizenry is the highest form of life. Thus, his idea of free citizenship immediately introduces the concept of limitations between citizens—the free and the not free, the masters and the slave. The consequence of his political theory is the introduction of inequality among the members of the society but the question is: was Aristotle right in justifying social inequality? The answer to it embodies the major issues of this work. How we can evaluate Aristotle’s positive and negative socio-political theories is one of the concerns of this paper. Effort will be made to critically explicate the good aspects of his theory as well as drawing a synthesis from the critique of the condemnable aspects of Aristotle’s political philosophy in fashioning out a formidable route for African political leaders.</em><em></em></p>


1969 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-132
Author(s):  
Daniel L. Migliore

“Our task today is to discern the interaction of God's promise and man's historical experience in the political arena. Men today are increasingly aware that major issues affecting the present and future quality of human life often take a social and political form. This being the case, God's promise must be apprehended in its political bearing if it is not to be an empty or escapist phrase for men in modern society. A proper understanding of the gospel today brings men into a creative opposition to experienced social and political realities.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document