scholarly journals Más allá de la polis: la bestia en Aristóteles / Beyond the Polis: Aristotle’s Beast

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuiza Martínez Rivera
Keyword(s):  
Women Workers ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Good Life ◽  
The Good Life ◽  
Happy Life ◽  
The Common ◽  
Las Mujeres ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Communicative Abilities

ABSTRACTIn Aristotelian political philosophy, the biological definition of man as a “political animal” functions as the premise upon which the polis can be created. According to Aristotle, man is an animal characterized by rational and communicative abilities that drive him to build communities in pursuit of the “good life.” This definition of human nature presupposes the creation of the polis as the only space where man can fully develop his virtues and live a full and happy life. However, Aristotle’s conception of the polis, only grants political participation within it to individuals that fit this description. This restriction begets the question of who remains beyond the margins of the polis? Beyond the boundaries of this political space remain all those who make life possible in the polis: women, workers, and slaves. Further yet, beyond all economic and social networks, lies the concept that will be the purpose of this article, the “beast,” a human characterized by a lack of political disposition, both in developed instances (like the polis) and the more primitive ones (like a tribe or the home). Following Aristotle’s logic, bestial men are not useful members of the community because they do not fulfill the role of the political animal, as their actions are not guided by the pursuit of the common good. We will argue that as a result, the beast suffers a triple exclusion: political, because he is denied citizenship; social, since he is barred from participating in the community that supports the polis economically; and, biologically for he is excluded from the conceptual group of human.RESUMENEn la filosofía política aristotélica, la definición biológica del hombre como “animal político” funciona como justificación para la creación de la polis. Aristóteles clasifica al hombre como un animal caracterizado por su habilidad racional y comunicativa, capacidades que lo determinan a formar comunidades con miras a la “vida buena”. Esta definición de la naturaleza humana supone la creación de la polis; el único espacio donde el hombre puede desarrollar sus virtudes y vivir una vida plena y feliz. Dentro de esta polis, Aristóteles le otorga participación política solo a los individuos que cum-plen con esta descripción. A partir de esto surge la pregunta: ¿Quiénes quedan al margen de la polis? Fuera de este espacio político quedan todos los que hacen posible la vida en la polis: las mujeres, los trabajadores y  los esclavos. Más allá de estas redes económicas y sociales queda el propósito de este artículo, la “bestia”: los seres humanos caracterizados por su carencia de disposición política tanto en instancias desarrolladas como la polis y las más primitivas como la aldea o el hogar. De esta manera, los hombres bestiales son inútiles para la vida en comunidad ya que no cumplen con su función como animales políticos y sus acciones no están guiadas por un bien común. Se argumentará que a partir de esto que la bestia padece una triple exclusión: la política, al negársele la posibilidad de ciudadanía; la social, al prohibirle la partici-pación en la comunidad que sustenta económicamente a la polis y, por último, la biológica al ser excluido del conjunto conceptual de los hombres.

scholarly journals The Other Dimension of Caring Thinking (with a new commentary by Phillip Cam)

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Margaret Sharp
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Creative Thinking ◽  
Good Life ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Good Life ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Matthew Lipman ◽  
Mental Acts

Life comes from physical or biological survival. But the good life comes from what we care about, what we value, what we think truly important, as distinguished from what we think merely trivial. What we care about is the source of the criteria we use to evaluate ideas, ideals, persons, events, things, and their importance in our lives. And it is these criteria that determine the judgments we make in our everyday lives. In the second edition of Thinking in Education, Matthew Lipman (2002) has indicated the importance of fostering critical, creative and caring thinking in children, if one is to prepare them to make better judgments and live qualitatively better lives. He tells us that caring thinking is appreciative thinking, active thinking, normative thinking, affective thinking and empathetic thinking and then goes on to list a number of mental acts under each of these categories. Maybe it is because ‘caring thinking’ is not as common a term as ‘critical thinking’ and ‘creative thinking’ in everyday educational language that we stop for pause when we hear it. However when we read what Lipman says about caring thinking, we find ourselves nodding and saying to ourselves, ‘Yes, that makes sense. To think caringly means to think ethically, affectively, normatively, appreciatively and to actively participate in society with a concern for the common good’ (Lipman 2002, p. 271). In a real sense what we care about is manifest in how we perform, participate, build, contribute and how we relate to others. It is thinking that reveals our ideals as well as what we think is valuable, what we are willing to fight and suffer for.

Extracting transparency: the process of regulating disclosures for the resources industry

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 472-495
Author(s):  
Corinne Cortese ◽  
Jane Andrew
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Regulatory Architecture ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
Resource Wealth ◽  
The Common ◽  
Comment Letters ◽  
Definition Of

PurposeMultinational resource companies (MRCs) are under pressure to become responsible corporate citizens. In particular, stakeholders are demanding more information about the deals these companies negotiate with the host governments of resource-rich nations, and there is general agreement about the need for industry commitment to transparency and the benefits that a mandatory disclosure regime would bring. This paper examines the production of one attempt to regulate disclosures related to payments between MRCs and the governments of nations with resource wealth: Section 1504 of the Dodd–Frank Act.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on Boltanski and Thévenot's (2006) Sociology of Worth, the authors examine the comment letters of participants in this process with a view to revealing how stakeholder groups produce justifications to promote their positions vis-à-vis transparency to regulators.FindingsThe authors show how justifications were mobilised by various constituents in an effort to shape the definition of transparency and the regulatory architecture that governs disclosure practices. In this case, the collective recognition of desirability of transparency enabled the SEC to suture together the views of constituents to create a shared understanding of the role of the common good as it relates to transparency.Originality/valueThis paper explores an alternative approach to the consideration of comment letters advanced during the process of disclosure-related rule-making. The authors show how a sophisticated regulator may be able to draw together elements stemming from different constituents in a way that appeals to a shared sense of the “common good” in order to produce Final Rules.

scholarly journals IMPLICATIONS OF THE CONCEPT OF THE “COMMON GOOD” FOR POLITICAL LEADERSHIP

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Good Life ◽  
The Good Life ◽  
Political Society ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The World ◽  
The Common

Political society is established for the provision of the good life for the citizens of the society. But to ensure that the task is carried out, political societies elect or appoint leaders saddled with the responsibility of guiding, directing, leading and organizing the society. Capable and efficient political leaders help their societies to develop economically and help the citizens to have access to the good life. They are concerned about the common good of the society. Inept and inefficient leaders often are concerned about their own selfish interests and bring miseries and suffering to their peoples. In spite of the ideals of good leadership and the positive values of working for the public interest and common good of their societies, there are still many political leaders who are in power for their own sakes. Because of this there are many underdeveloped and poor societies especially in the Global South. This paper uses a critical analytic and hermeneutic method to examine and appraise the concept of the common good and its implications for political leaders. The value of the common good is applicable to every society. Political leaders everywhere are to strive for the common good. The paper finds that bad and corrupt political leaders are still prevalent in many societies in the world. The presented research will also help to designate the feature of the articulation of «common good» in the modern philosophical conceptions. The paper concludes that there is need to highlight the value of the common good that political leaders should strive for and help their societies obtain. This done there will be a higher level of peace and harmonies in political societies.

scholarly journals Going beyond Faith: Kierkegaard’s Critical Contribution to Public Theology

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 527-540
Author(s):  
Joshua Furnal
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Basic Question ◽  
Public Theology ◽  
Faith And Reason ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Testimonial Knowledge ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Definition Of

In this article, I argue that Kierkegaard’s distinction between a genius and an apostle sheds light on the role of public theology in society. For Kierkegaard, the act and content of faith are rooted in testimonial knowledge which can be shared, and yet also bear witness to divine authority in word and deed. In the first section, I suggest that the contemporary conflict of approaches in public theology is rooted in a basic question in theology regarding the primacy of faith or reason when justifying a concrete, non-theological definition of the common good. In the second section, I rehearse Kierkegaard’s famous distinction between a genius and an apostle to draw attention to how the role of the public theologian in society is regulated by the theological negotiation of faith and reason for the common good in the form of testimony. The upshot of my argument is to uncover the unjustified neglect of the rich resources in Kierkegaard’s writings for current debates about public theology.

The Citizenship Status of Criminal Offenders

2018 ◽  
pp. 88-125
Author(s):  
Milena Tripkovic
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Good Life ◽  
Civic Virtue ◽  
The Good Life ◽  
Criminal Offenders ◽  
Citizenship Rights ◽  
Citizenship Status ◽  
The Common ◽  
Sense Of Justice ◽  
Number Of Individuals

This chapter aims to translate the three models into tangible citizenship conditions, allowing us to establish whether criminal offenders ought to retain their citizenship rights post-conviction. It is argued that—under the first model—most criminals remain citizens since episodic violations do not signal a lack of capacity for a “sense of justice.” Similarly, most criminal offenders are not without “civic virtue”—they remain self-governing subjects whose civic qualities can be enhanced. Finally, while criminals certainly act against the “common good,” most remain valuable members of the community who bring forward a specific vision of the good life, which prevents the community from excluding them. All three models, however, equally point toward the existence of a small number of individuals who are without crucial citizenship requirements, and the chapter concludes that—regardless of differences between the three models—all of them similarly permit exclusions of persons with strong, incorrigible anti-social inclinations.

scholarly journals Recovering the Common Good: The Key to a truly Prosperous Society?

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 319
Author(s):  
Andrew Bradstock
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Social Teaching ◽  
The Good Life ◽  
Common Life ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of

This article argues that the common good would have much to contribute to political discourse in New Zealand at the present time. Beginning with a definition of the concept, particularly as it has developed within Catholic Social Teaching, the article examines attempts by New Zealand church leaders to introduce it into public debate in recent decades, and concludes that, were the common good to be given serious consideration today, it would both prompt New Zealanders to look critically at their society and consider the purpose of their common life together, and enhance their quality of life individually and communally. The article addresses the charge that promoting the common good might be seen as favouring one (religiously-inspired) notion of 'the good life' over others, and, following Raymond Plant, suggests that, in a pluralist society, a more appropriate starting point for a conversation about such issues would be an exploration of 'social justice'. The article also explores the extent to which markets and governments might promote the common good.

scholarly journals Per una pianificazione "a misura" di territorio

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Perrone
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Cooperative Behaviour ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Size Type ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of

The text proposes several approaches for reflection on the subject of the governance of territorial consumption, addressing two critical issues: the dimensioning of planning and the concept of territory as a common good. The latter is understood as the outcome of cooperative behaviour and interactive practices aimed at recognition of the value of the places and the definition of rules of settlement for the protection of increasingly scarce collective resources. Exploring the relations between the limits of efficacy of the mechanisms for dimensioning the plans and responsibilities of the policies for governance of the territory – increasingly torn between public and private interests and not sufficiently "shared" - the book offers food for thought on the role of a "territorial-size" type of planning in the acknowledgement and management of the common goods.

On everyday academic research

2017 ◽  
pp. 98-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Tirole
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Economic Research ◽  
Relevant Research ◽  
The Common ◽  
Verification Of Models ◽  
Science And Research

In the fourth chapter of the book “The economy of the common good”, the nature of economics as a science and research practices in their theoretical and empirical aspects are discussed. The author considers the processes of modeling, empirical verification of models and evaluation of research quality. In addition, the features of economic cognition and the role of mathematics in economic research are analyzed, including the example of relevant research in game theory and information theory.

Zeit und gutes Leben

2020 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 493-513
Author(s):  
Holmer Steinfath
Keyword(s):  
Internal Structure ◽  
Good Life ◽  
External Factor ◽  
Life Time ◽  
The Good Life ◽  
Adequate Understanding ◽  
Gutes Leben

Time is a neglected subject in recent, especially analytically minded reflections on the good life. The article highlights the fundamental role of time and temporality for an adequate understanding of the good life. Time functions both as an external factor with which we have to reckon in our practical deliberations and as an internal structure of living our lives. It is argued that striving for a good life also means striving for being in harmony with the time of one's life. The exploration of this idea allows to link analytical with phenomenological approaches to time and good life.

Contributions of Contemporary Political Science to an Understanding of the Common Good

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.J. Matthew Carnes
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Scientific Theory ◽  
Theory Building ◽  
Catholic Theology ◽  
Politics And Government ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Nature And Society

The transformation of political science in recent decades opens the door for a new but so far poorly cultivated examination of the common good. Four significant “turns” characterize the modern study of politics and government. Each is rooted in the discipline’s increased emphasis on empirical rigor, with its attendant scientific theory-building, measurement, and hypothesis testing. Together, these new orientations allow political science to enrich our understanding of causality, our basic definitions of the common good, and our view of human nature and society. In particular, the chapter suggests that traditional descriptions of the common good in Catholic theology have been overly irenic and not sufficiently appreciative of the role of contention in daily life, on both a national and international scale.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document