ABSTRACTIn this article, the intention is twofold. To introduce and substantiate Søren Kierkegaard’s notion of love and to put this notion in relation to the Romantics. The article is divided into six sections. I first offer a brief description of Kierkegaard’s view on the Romantics, his affections and his disagreements. Secondly, I will introduce Kierkegaard’s own notion of love that rest partly on Plato’s view on eros as passion, partly on the biblical definitions of love in 1 John and Matthew. (...) Thirdly, I will present Kierkegaard’s notion of love as a double urge to love and to be love and contrast this double-bound urge with Anders Nygren’s notion of eros and agape and C. S. Lewis’ differentiation between Need-Love and Gift-Love. In the fourth section, I will discuss the relation between human and divine love. In the fifth section, I will introduce Kierkegaard’s notion of being in love as preferential love. And finally, in the sixth paragraph, I will address Kierkegaard’s view on neighbor love. (shrink)

Resource development takes place through the transformation of social institutions. The moral dimension is of crucial importance in the evolution of associated management regimes. More than just a code of ethics, moralities are predicated on what is understood to be 'the good'. Recognition of the good requires a rhetoric beyond those of power and interest. This paper proposes a rhetoric of love. Within this conception of morality, the management of human relationships becomes understood as an unfolding cycle of choice among (...) tragic choices and management of the non-human environment is accomplished through the realisation of the gift relationship. (shrink)

This essay evaluates Jean-Luc Marion’s claim in The Erotic Phenomenon that eros and agape are “two names selected among an infinity of others in order to think and to say the one love” (221). I will defend his attempt to unite agape and eros against Jacques Derrida’s claim that we must love without any desire for reciprocity. Additionally, I will indicate what implications Marion’s account of love has for a discussion of love and its reasons. Marion correctly identifies the paradox (...) at the heart of love: that in order to truly love, I must give up my demand for assurance, although I may still maintain the hope that another will love me. While Marion offers an important corrective to Derrida’s account of pure agape, I will argue that his account of love that includes both eros and agape ultimately resembles Derrida’s pure agape too closely because Marion does not sufficiently acknowledge the role of reciprocity in love. (shrink)

The political philosopher Hannah Arendt develops several arguments regarding why truthfulness cannot be counted among the political virtues. This article shows that similar arguments apply to lying in business. Based on Hannah Arendt's theory, we distinguish five reasons why lying is a structural temptation to businessmen: business is about action to change the world and therefore businessmen need the capacity to deny current reality; commerce requires successful image-making and liars have the advantage to come up with plausible stories; business communication (...) is more often about opinions than about facts, giving leeway to ignore uncomfortable signals; business increasingly makes use of plans and models, but these techniques foster inflexibility in acknowledging the real facts; and businessmen easily fall prey to self-deception, because one needs to act as if the vision already materializes. The theory is illustrated by a case study of Landis, which grew from a relatively insignificant organization into a large one within a short period of time, but ended with outright lies and bankruptcy. (shrink)

The teaching of mediation in Islamic tradition refers to a person requesting forgiveness of another and in the Christian tradition apart from forgiveness includes the bestowal of goodness to another as well. Motahhari and Brümmer consider the acceptance of mediation to be faced with the problem of superiority of the mediator’s mercy as compared to God’s mercy and the limitedness of God’s benevolence. Motahhari believes the answer to this problem to be in the attention to the hierarchy in the world’s (...) system and the bestowal of good to creation in the form of a linear system; mediation is not the existential cause for forgiveness but rather the preparatory cause for the bestowal of forgiveness from God. As a reply to this problem, Brümmer addresses God’s permission for man’s participation in spreading good to others in the form of prayers. According to Brümmer, God has made the world such that through prayers – while establishing a loving relationship with God – man can also have an active participation with God’s power in the acceptance of prayer. In this way, Motahhari and Brümmer with their answers consider mediation and God’s absolute benevolence to be consistent with one another. According to both, the world has an order in which man can play a role in spreading good to others with God’s permission. (shrink)