Two possible objections to Wolterstorff’s critique of eudaimonism

posted in: Bits and Pieces, Philosophy | 0

In chapter one of “Justice and Love” Nicholas Wolterstorff introduces his proposed ethical view of agapism, comparing it with the three macro systems of ethical thought: egoism, eudaimonism, and utilitarianism. I find his critiques conclusive against egoism and utilitarianism; his critique against eudaimonism seems less persuasive. To be clear, on the whole I do not differ with his argument, but it seems to me that his argument against eudaimonism does not preclude two possible objections.

Karol Wojtyla and Martha Nussbaum on Human Essentials: Part II

Part II: Martha Nussbaum’s “Human Functioning and Social Justice: In Defense of Aristotelian Essentialism” seeks to delineate certain essential human characteristics, with the end of normatively grounding a liberal capabilities polity. In my view, Karol Wojtyla’s “Person and Act” gives strong support in the epistemology of person to her capabilities project.

Karol Wojtyla and Martha Nussbaum on Human Essentials: Part I

Part I: Martha Nussbaum’s “Human Functioning and Social Justice: In Defense of Aristotelian Essentialism” seeks to delineate certain essential human characteristics, with the end of normatively grounding a liberal capabilities polity. In my view, Karol Wojtyla’s “Person and Act” gives strong support in the epistemology of person to her capabilities project.

Gratuitousness and Reciprocity Contrasted

Enzo Bianchi: In any case, if the other does not accept or receive forgiveness, the one who forgives, in forgiving, affirms gratuitousness. He affirms that he wants to re-initiate the relationship with the other—the one who wronged him—from the beginning. He wants in some way to say that he does not want reciprocity. This to me is what is truly and profoundly human in forgiving.

1 2 3