Suchergebnisse

"This book examines politics through the lens of art and literature. Through discussion on great works of visual art, literature, and cultural representations of political thought in the medieval, early modern, and American eras, it explores the relevance of the nation-state to human freedom and flourishing, as well as the concept of citizenship and statesmanship that it implies, in contrast to that of the 'global community'. The essays in the volume focus on the shifting notions of various core political concepts like citizenship, republicanism, and nationalism from antiquity to the present-day to provide a systematic understanding of their evolving histories through Western Art and literature, highlighting works such as the Bayeux Tapestry, Shakespeare's Henry V, Henry VI, and A Midsummer Night's Dream, Twain's Joan of Arc and Hermann's Nichts als Gespenster, among several other canonical works of political interest. Further, it questions if we should now look beyond the nation-state to some form of tans-national, global community to pursue the human freedom desired by progressives, or look at smaller forms of community resembling the polis to pursue the friendship and nobility valued by the ancients. The volume will be invaluable to students and teachers of political science, especially political theory and philosophy, visual arts, and world literature"--

"This book explores the recovery of Socratic philosophy in 19th century political thought of G.W.F. Hegel, Soren Kierkegaard, John Stuart Mill, and Friedrich Nietzsche. For Kierkegaard the Socratic indivdual in modern times is the person of faith, for Mill the idiosyncratic public intellectual, and for Nietzsche the Dionysian artist"--

Contemplating friendship in Aristotle's Ethics -- Teleology, inequality and autonomy -- Moral virtue: possibilities and limits -- Justice: giving to each what is owed -- Intellectual virtue, Akrasia and political philosophy -- Citizens, friends and philosophers -- Happiness and maternal contemplation

This article explores how Sophocles' Oedipus the King and Plato's Apology of Socrates address the question of whether reason can ground the good human life. Sophocles' tragedy and Plato's dialogue both tell of the search for rational self-knowledge. Both Oedipus and Socrates are recognized for human wisdom and are presented as skeptical toward the gods. Yet, whereas Oedipus' life ends in tragedy, Socrates' life does not. Sophocles thus suggests that the rational search for truth must be limited by a pious respect for the gods. Plato, on the other hand, preserves Socrates' belief that the 'unexamined life is not worth living for a human being'. Four lines of inquiry into the causes of this divergence are then explored: 1) Socrates' order of knowledge from particular to universal, 2) Oedipus' proneness to anger, 3) Socrates' private life in contrast to Oedipus' public life and, 4) the differing status of the family.

In book 7 of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that vice, lack of self-restraint (akrasia), and brutishness are to be avoided. While the opposite of vice is virtue, the opposite of akrasia is self-restraint, and of brutishness a form of divinity. This article explores Aristotle's analysis of self-restraint and its lack, akrasia, focusing on the phenomenon of akrasia and its causes. Self-restraint is the experience of excessive and idiosyncratic desires that are nevertheless resisted. Like self-restraint, akrasia, or lack of self-restraint, involves the experience of excessive and idiosyncratic desires. However, those lacking in self-restraint give in to these desires; the unrestrained person knows the good but does the opposite nonetheless. Possible causes of akrasia are the overpowering of reason by desire among the young and the effeminacy of some women and womanly men. This article argues, however, that the most interesting cause of akrasia in Aristotle's account is theoretical thinking. Adapted from the source document.

Aristotle's discussion of political friendship points to perfect friendship and the possibility that the good citizen can be the good person. This conclusion is arrived at by reflection on three problems raised in Aristotle's analysis. First, citizen friendships of utility are the cause of civil strife. Second, there is a tension between citizen friendship in timocracy and justice. Although citizen friendship in a timocracy can aspire to perfect friendship, political justice requires kingship. Third, familial friendship, although natural, is more limited in scope than political friendship. This article concludes with Aristotle's discussion of conflicting obligations that opens up two grounds of natural friendship: relations to persons through body, and relations to persons who are virtuous. Virtue relations in timocracy allow citizen friendship to resemble perfect friendship.

This article explores the virtues of generosity and magnificence in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. Generosity involves private individuals giving moderately; magnificence is spending by individuals on a grand scale for public purposes. Inequality, it is argued, grounds and motivates these virtues. For Aristotle, generosity and magnificence are products of inherited wealth, and the generous and the magnificent person seek the noble in their actions rather than the benefit of their recipients. The generous and the magnificent intend to place themselves in a superior position to those who receive their gifts.Moreover, magnificence flows from a great inequality of wealth and requires that the provision of public goods be in private hands. Aristotle, this article suggests, means to critique rather than embrace these virtues by pointing to the inequality and privacy at their foundation. The way in which Aristotle's theory of justice supplements his analysis of generosity and magnificence is also brought to light.