A Companion to the Spanish Scholastics offers a much-needed survey of the entire field of early modern Spanish scholastic thought. The volume introduces main themes and contexts of scholastics inquiry (theology, philosophy, ethics, politics, economics, law, science and the senses) through close examination of a wide range of texts, debates, methods, and authors, as well as in-depth discussion of the relevant literature. Each chapter includes a useful bibliography and serves as point of departure for future research. The volume not only (...) draws the sum of existing research, but also challenges established notions and breaks new ground. (shrink)

In his recent book Linguistic Justice for Europe and for the World, Philippe Van Parijs argues in favor of the dissemination of English as the lingua franca. This, however, might entail certain forms of injustice. In the first part of this contribution, the three forms of injustice that Van Parijs discusses are presented along with his three respective solutions to these problems. At the same time, some criticisms on each of these forms are mentioned which have come forth in recent (...) literature. The second part of this paper examines the claim underlying Van Parijs’s book, viz. that it is a good thing to promote English as a common language. According to Van Parijs, this is necessary for developing an egalitarian conception of global justice as well as implementing such a conception. This article scrutinizes both of these arguments which are only briefly touched on in the book. I argue that a lingua franca is not a necessary condition for developing and implementing such an egalitarian conception. I defend this position through a close study of Van Parijs’s conception of deliberative democracy, which is a very demanding one. I show that even in a system of deliberative democracy, a common language is not a necessary condition for developing an egalitarian conception of justice. With reference to the theory of constitutional patriotism, I then argue that common values, rather than a common language, are more important for developing and implementing such a conception. (shrink)

De Brabantse humanist Justus Lipsius (1547-1606) verwierf in zijn eigen tijd naam en faam met zijn filologische en antiquarische studies, en meer nog met zijn filosofische en politieke werken.

1516 saw the publication of three important works. First of all, it is the year of Thomas More’s Utopia. But it is also the year in which Erasmus published his major political work The Education of the Christian Prince. The third work even appeared with the same publisher as More’s Utopia, viz. Nicolaas Everaerts’s Topica or legal commonplaces. All three works are remarkable in their own way. Erasmus represents a tradition that goes back to Petrarch and that saw the well-being (...) of society as totally dependent on the virtuousness of its prince. For Thomas More this was far too risky and therefore he sketched a radical alternative that was based on a reorganisation of society as a whole. However appealing his imaginary island was, it is remarkable that within the domain of political theory it did not attract too much attention. Most authors focused on another work, that was conceived in the very same period, viz. Machiavelli’s Prince. The present article will shed light on these developments by focusing on the work of two further early-modern intellectuals active in the Netherlands. Both Justus Lipsius and Leonardus Lessius, whose work bears a strong resemblance to that of Everaerts, looked for the ideal society. And this was not a society after the model of More, but a society modelled after a well-defined form of Machiavellism. (shrink)

This is a remarkable book on an important theme, namely, knowing ourselves, which the author elaborates in three meditations. The first is devoted to the virtues and vices of the tongue, that is, the relationship between truth and deceit. It is in this chapter that irony, the central concept of the book, is most fully elaborated. The second has war as its central theme and deals first and foremost with the possibility of civilizing war. Is there any sanity in war? (...) In the last meditation, a bunch of related questions are treated that boil down to the role of security, prosperity, happiness, and pleasure in life. Each of the three meditations is a fine and erudite examination wherein the author tries to unravel an... (shrink)