According to familiar accounts, Rousseau held that humans are actuated by two distinct kinds of self love: amour de soi, a benign concern for one's self-preservation and well-being; and amour-propre, a malign concern to stand above other people, delighting in their despite. I argue that although amour-propre can (and often does) assume this malign form, this is not intrinsic to its character. The first and best rank among men that amour-propre directs us to claim for ourselves is that of occupying (...) 'man's estate'. This does not require, indeed it precludes, subjection of others. Amour-propre does not need suppression or circumscription if we are to live good lives; it rather requires direction to its proper end, not a delusive one. (shrink)
In this review article, the book by J.H. van Wyk, Augustine: A study on the ethics of the church father from Africa is presented and discussed. Short overviews of the content of the six chapters are given. They are: Introduction – the necessity for a book on Augustine’s ethics in Afrikaans, Orientation – an overview of his life and works, Grounding – the relationship between dogmatics and ethics, Typology – the character of his ethics, Themes – marriage and sexual ethics, (...) political ethics and animal ethics, Findings – evaluation of Augustine’s ethics. Support is given to the argument that Augustine is an important forerunner to the Reformation. Information is provided on Augustine and the early years of the Reformation in Wittenberg. Critical remarks are made about the author’s understanding of the relationship between faith and works, dogmatics and ethics. The Lutheran understanding of this topic is presented as an important alternative to the Reformed version that is defended in this book. Finally, attention is given to Augustine’s ‘theory of the two cities’. Also in this regard advice is given from one of Luther’s publication. His exposition of Mary’s Song in Luke 1:46–55 is used as an example of how a witness to the government could look like. (shrink)
D. Compaeetti, Leggi antiche delta città di Gortyna, Firenze, 1885 F. Bücheler and E. Zitelmann, Rheinisches Museum N. F. Bd. 40 J. and T. Baunack, Die Inschrift von Gortyn, Stuttgart, 1886H. Lewy, Stadtrecht von Gortyn, Berlin, 1885Museo Italiano di Antickità classiche, edited by D. Comparetti, Florence, 1885 sqq. Vols. i, ii.
In The Moral Foundation of Professional Ethics Alan H. Goldman provides a general approach to the evaluation of the ethical responsibilities of professionals in diverse fields, and offers specific prescriptions for judges, politicians, lawyers, doctors, and businesspersons. This Review Essay describes Goldman’s principal arguments and conclusions, and illuminates a number of the major difficulties with his treatment of professional ethics. First, his argument for a common moral framework is not compelling. It is not clear, as Goldman claims, that it is (...) possible for individuals with radically different values to reach agreement on difficult moral issues. Goldman's assertion that a theory of rights is part of the common moral framework is even more questionable. Second, there is reason to doubt that Goldman's focus on the concept of role differentiation as the basic approach to professional ethics is correct. This is demonstrated through examination of Goldman's discussion of the ethical positions of judges and lawyers. (shrink)
T hese are indignant times. Reading news- papers, talking to friends or coworkers, we seem often to live in a state of perpetual moral outrage.The targets of our indignation depend on the particular group, religion, and political party we are associated with. If the Terry Schiavo case does not convince of you of this, take the issue of same-sex marriage. Conservatives are furious over the prospect of gays and lesbians marrying, and liberals are furious that conservatives are furious. But has (...) anyone on either side subjected their views to serious scrutiny? What’s the response, for example, when conservatives are asked exactly why gays and lesbians shouldn’t be allowed to marry? “It threatens the institution of marriage.” OK. How? “Marriage is between a man and a woman.” (Democ- rats give this answer as well.) Right, but why? “It’s unnatu- ral.” Isn’t that true of marriage in general? “Well… look… I.. (shrink)