Many social theorists hold that the corporation is the key institution of the modern world. Novak wrote four books on the corporation, viewing it as the chief instrument of innovation within “democratic capitalism”, and the concrete entity in which its three systems (political, economic, moral-cultural) converge. We look at Novak’s account with its roots in Maritain, and at Novak’s intention to ground this account in the ideals of the American Founding, and in a Christian understanding of grace. “The corporation” turns (...) out to be an excellent pathway into Novak’s thought and a safeguard against some fundamental mistakes in interpreting him. (shrink)

This article argues that political liberalism, of the type formulated by John Rawls and Charles Larmore and further developed in Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum's capabilities approach, is superior to more comprehensive political views both in domestic and in global affairs. Perfectionist liberalism as advocated by John Stuart Mill and Joseph Raz attempts to erase existing religions and replace them with the religion of utility or autonomy. This is wrong, because in the ethico-religious environment of reasonable disagreement that we inhabit (...) all comprehensive forms of political morality pose a threat to people's liberty and equality. Only thin and narrow conceptions of value like the ones suggested by Rawls, Larmore, Sen, and Nussbaum can guarantee the respect for diversity that is needed in a pluralistic world. Although Rawls famously failed to extend this idea from domestic to transnational matters, the argument of the article is that not only do the principles of political liberalism apply to global mat.. (shrink)

What is commonly called a right has since about 1980 increasingly come to be called a subjective right. In this paper the origin and rise of this solecism is investigated. Its use can result in a lack of clarity and even confusion. Some aspects of rights-concepts and their history are also discussed. A brief postscript introduces Leibniz's Razor.

B a c k g r o u n d. The article examines the concept of human rights. This concept in modern philosophical discourse is both vague and imprecise. Although most authors recognize the lack of unanimity in the definition of the concept of human rights, few have tried to find out the reasons for this situation. The purpose of this study is to identify the sources of the problematic definition of the concept of human rights by means of a (...) logical analysis of the concept and to propose ways to overcome the identified difficulties in the interpretation of this concept. M e t h o d s. A philosophical hermeneutic approach combined with a comparative and terminological analysis of the concept of human rights was used in the study. R e s u l t s. Human rights discourse is fundamentally open: it is normatively undetermined, and anyone can join it. It is therefore inevitably polyphonic and multilingual. As a result, this discourse contains very different understandings of the most important thing: what human rights really are. Efforts to find a universal definition of the concept of human rights seem to be an attempt to unite under one roof things that are poorly or not at all combined: different ontological understandings, different scopes of the concept, and different logical characteristics. C o n c l u s i o n s. The difficulty of logical analysis of the concept of human rights, i.e. its assignment to a specific type, and its unambiguous interpretation and definition, is related to: 1) the lack of definition of the limits of scope of the concept of human rights in philosophical discourse and the insufficient definition of the limits of this concept as a legal notion; 2) the need to assess the legitimacy of the retrospective extrapolation of the term ‘human rights' to the entire body of works created before the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in which it was not used (in the Ukrainian context, this aspect is not obvious due to historical and linguistic peculiarities); 3) different ontological understanding of human rights by different actors in the discourse that makes it impossible to combine their positions under the same umbrella (e.g. according to one position, human rights are seen as anthropological attributes of a person; according to another, they are norms regulating social relations). The above testifies to the complexity of an unambiguous logical characteristic of the analyzed concept. It seems that thе situation does not allow for a single definition of the concept of "human rights". It is assumed that it is not a single concept, but a plurality of concepts. In this case, the position of the discourse participant in relation to a certain system of criteria and its justification may be a way to overcome the difficulties we have identified. (shrink)

New Blackfriars, Volume 103, Issue 1107, Page 640-661, September 2022.

A classic debate in the history of philosophy is that between rationalists and empiricists concerning the “true” source of human knowledge. In legal philosophy this debate has been reflected in the classic opposition between natural law and legal positivist perspectives. Even the currently predominant inclusivist perspectives on the nature of law, such as inclusive legal positivism and inclusive legal non-positivism, are not immune to such a dichotomy. In this paper I attempt to present an understanding of specific cognitive characteristics of (...) prevailing legal theories from the perspective of the theory of psychological types as developed by Carl G. Jung. (shrink)

Early modern theorists linked the idea of sovereign power to a conception of absolute power developed during the medieval period. Ockham had reframed the already extant distinction between God's absolute and ordained powers in order to argue that God was free of moral constraint in ordaining natural law for human beings. Thus, the natural law could command the opposite of what God had ordained if He wished to make it so. Bodin extended Ockham's argument to earthly sovereigns, who do not (...) (he argued) have to obey civil law. However, Bodin undermined his absolutism by maintaining that civil law has to be consistent with natural and divine law. Hobbes more consistently argued that while mortal sovereigns are accountable to God, the power of sovereigns to command is not subject to moral constraints. Underlying Ockham's view of God's sovereignty, and Bodin's and Hobbes's view of earthly sovereigns, is a notion of the will's unconstrained power. But this notion is self-referentially incoherent. This incoherence, in turn, infects the very notion of sovereignty. (shrink)

The notion of societal structural principles is the foundation stone of Dooyeweerd’s social philosophy, and of the political and legal philosophy grounded in it, yet it has so far received little detailed critical analysis or constructive reformulation among reformational scholars. The aim of this paper is the modest one of illustrating the kind of analysis still to be done if the notion is to be put to more constructive use within social theory. I shall say little about the epistemological or (...) methodological implications of the notion, concentrating on its central ontological problematics. I shall do so by discussing the notion with special reference to its specific application to one particular societal structure, namely the state. Part I analyses Dooyeweerd’s general account of the notion of societal structural principles. I identify there a number of critical problems running through the paper, especially: a) the problem of how structural principles secure the internal unity of a societal structure; b) the distinction between the invariant character of societal structural principles, and the variable forms in which they are positivised; and c) the undeveloped link between societal structures and the structure of the human person. Part II illustrates these problems in relation to Dooyeweerd’s account of the structural principle of the state. Part III briefly sketches the direction of a possible reformulation of the notion of societal structural principles in the light of a more fully elaborated philosophical anthropology. (shrink)

Moral people (i) have good goals in acting in a challenging situation; and (ii) use their rightly disposed intellectual and voluntary capacities (virtues) and resources to choose a good action in that situation. This requires (iii) sound ethical deliberation and decision-procedures for realising practically the abstract values and principles relevant in the concrete situation. After deliberation about sub-goals and means, they (iv) choose to execute the best particular action plan. They will have canvassed possible outcomes of the intended act, which, (...) when executed, will have a particular result and (v) consequent outcomes for themselves, and for others; and (vi) it will show respect for the wellbeing of the community or wider society, represented by the state, and reflected in state law. A comprehensive third-party moral judgement on the act will encompass the intention and execution of the act in the situation.Part 1, Sections I-IV of this paper argue that organisations can be said to be quasi-persons, personal and moral. As artificial organisational quasi-persons, with a similar structure to natural persons, they can also have analogues of the moral features of natural persons’ moral acts: i)-vi): good goals, rightly disposed capacities and resources, ethical decision procedures, good acts or activities, with good outcomes for others, and respect for society’s norms represented in state law. An ethical acronym, GREAOS, capturing the six dominant features shared with natural persons, is suggested.In Part 2, an application of GREAOS is then made to assess a concrete organisational case, Mondragon Corporation, in order to show how if the analogy between persons and organisations is sound in principle, the acronym’s application can be made to ethically unpack a case. The acronym gives Mondragon Corporation at least a pass on ethics. Although a work in progress, its success in realising ideals of economic democracy can be an exemplar of stakeholder capitalism, an alternative to an unbridled shareholder capitalism, which has had its day. (shrink)

To mark the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the author embarked on an attempt to analyze the theoretical and historical framework that contributed to the adoption of the document. The first part of the article discusses the development of the philosophy of personalism from Mounier to Maritain and analyzes Maritain’s views on human rights. In the second part of the article, the author shows the decisive influence of the personalists Charles Malik and Rene (...) Cassin on the adoption of the document, which clearly bears the mark of the Christian personalistic discourse and notions. (shrink)

This article examines the nature of individual goods, public goods, and the common good in the context of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID). ‘Common’ in ‘common good’ is what applies to all persons without exception, and ‘good’ is what contributes to human flourishing. The common good is regarded as the communion of persons in good living. Addressing the relationship between the economy and society, it is proposed that the marketplace subsists within society. Acknowledging that we are deeply connected, the article (...) employs the philosophies of MacIntyre, Maritain and Sandel to highlight the importance of reciprocity, relationships, and generosity as characteristics of the common good. Two narratives in the public discourse are observed in these COVID days – one characterised by fear and selfishness, the other by hope and generosity. The author recognises that this pandemic can be conceived as a ‘wicked’ problem in a ‘volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous’ world, and implications for leaders and citizens in managing COVID are suggested. (shrink)

Taking the use of the logos in Ratzinger's Regensburg Lecture as its starting point, the thesis expands three horizons in Ratzinger studies. Firstly, it extends the understanding of Ratzinger as the author of a logos theology. Secondly, it shows how the Regensburg theme of the full breadth of reason, represented by the logos, is applied by Ratzinger in a critique of secular modernity. Thirdly, it claims that the logos theology of Joseph Ratzinger can provide a repair of the culture of (...) human rights. The thesis argues that if human rights are set exclusively within the framework of secular modernity, they fall sick and fail to meet the criterion of inclusivity and universality. Set within the framework of a Ratzingerian logos theology, their power is strengthened and their promise of inclusivity and universality restored. The thesis calls for a mutually reparative dialogue about human rights, based on the full breadth of reason, between the three constituencies of Christianity, the religions and secular modernity. The thesis concludes that the Regensburg Lecture, far from damaging the dialogue with Islam, and with secular modernity, opens up a new intercultural bridge based on a mutually enriching engagement with a logos-based culture of human rights. (shrink)

Jacques Maritain is widely recognized as one of the foremost Catholic philosophers of modern times. He wrote groundbreaking works in all branches of philosophy. For a period of about 10 years, beginning in 1933, he discussed matters relating to war and ethics. Writing initially about Gandhi, whose strategy of non-violence he sought to incorporate within a Christian conception of political action, Maritain proceeded to comment more specifically on the religious aspects of armed force in “On Holy War,” an essay about (...) the civil war then ongoing in Spain. After the outbreak of World War II in September 1939, Maritain penned a series of essays that sought to explain why the Anglo–French declarations of war were warranted on Christian just war principles. While the secondary literature on Maritain’s thought is extensive, thus far there has been little systematic exploration of his writings on war. In what follows I seek to remedy this lacuna, by examining how he conceptualized just war in the three phases outlined above. (shrink)

Jeffrey Stout claims that John Rawls's idea of public reason (IPR) has contributed to a Christian backlash against liberalism. This essay argues that those whom Stout calls “antiliberal traditionalists” have misunderstood Rawls in important ways, and goes on to consider Stout's own critiques of the IPR. While Rawls's idea is often interpreted as a blanket prohibition on religious reasoning outside church and home, the essay will show that the very viability of the IPR depends upon a rich culture of deliberation (...) in which all forms of reasoning can be put forth for consideration. This clarification addresses the perception that the IPR imposes an “asymmetrical burden” upon believers. In fact, the essay suggests that there are good reasons why believers, qua believers, might endorse the IPR. (shrink)

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the virtue of temperance as a moral competence in professional performance. The analysis relies on three different streams of literature: virtue ethics, positive psychology and competency-based management. The paper analyzes how temperance is defined in each of these perspectives. The paper proposes an integrative definition of temperance as “moral competence” and summarizes behaviors in business environments in which temperance plays a role.

This article attempts to articulate a grounding of animal rights based on inherent worth as the most fitting way to draw attention to the moral status of animals. The primary objective is to identify the proper grounds of those rights. To that end, two influential philosophical accounts of animal rights are first surveyed: Martha Nussbaum’s capabilities approach and Tom Regan’s deontological argument. These are followed by two theistic accounts of rights put forth by Andrew Linzey and Nicholas Wolterstorff. It is (...) argued that the latter two complementary accounts based on inherent worth bestowed by God develop a stronger grounding than versions grounded on intrinsic capacities. (shrink)

This article shows that the work of Jacques Maritain and Emmanuel Mounier contains a distinct political theory. Despite the differences in the foundations of their thought, Maritain and Mounier were both Catholic philosophers looking for the task of man in society. They both came to the conclusion that the vocation of man necessarily implies a social and political aspect. The integral development of the human person requires a societal framework, which is the common good that politics is supposed to realize. (...) However, both Maritain and Mounier point to the intrinsic dangers of the required exercise of political power. Alert and active citizens are necessary to keep political authorities from going astray. A lot of personalists' concrete ideas on the organization of democracy are no longer viable, but the core of their political theory is a particular vision on individual political responsibility. What personalism makes clear is that politics concerns each one of us. This is not the case because politics would be a distinguished occupation in the Aristotelian sense, since the personalists focus on the dark side of politics; the power struggle, the façade of democracy, the tendency towards oppression and totalitarianism. Politics is, however, a necessary means to build and protect the framework that allows us to develop ourselves as human beings. The only way to ensure that politics lives up to this task is when citizens take political responsibility. This call for a generally vigilant and active citizenry remains an important warning with regard to a liberal concept of man and society. (shrink)

The article analyzes the recent ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court amending article 580 of the Italian Criminal Code, relating to aid and incitement to suicide. According to the first Assize Court of Milan, article 580, conceived in 1930, reflects the fascist culture of its author. The problem of the Constitutional Court was therefore to establish whether a democratic state can still place limits on aid for suicide and in what terms it can do so.