The idea that there is a distinctively practical use of reason, and correspondingly a distinctively practical form of knowledge, unites many otherwise diverse voices in the history of practical philosophy: from Aristotle to Kant, from Rousseau to Marx, from Hegel to G.E.M. Anscombe, and many others. This volume gathers works by scholars who take inspiration from these and many other historical figures in order to deepen our systematic understanding of questions raised by their work that still are, or ought to (...) be, at the center of contemporary philosophical debate: the form and nature of practical reasoning, agential self-consciousness or practical knowledge, how knowledge of the good relates to our motivational capacity, and the shape of philosophical thinking about sound forms of living together. Accordingly, the volume is divided into three parts: action theory, meta-ethics, and political philosophy. This fusion of perspectives delivers novel possibilities not only for answering the systematic questions outlined above, but also for understanding both what unifies and distinguishes those historical voices that have sought to articulate the concept of practical reason. “This fascinating volume brings out the richness and profundity of an oft-neglected approach to understanding human agency, one that foregrounds action as itself an exercise of reason. Essays on ethics, mind, action, and political philosophy explore the history, substance, and implications of this idea, cutting across while also revealing the unity underlying various parts of philosophy that are typically treated separately.” – Eric Marcus, Auburn University. (shrink)

This paper attempts to show how Adorno’s thought can illuminate our reflections on the future of work. It does so by situating Adorno’s conception of genuine activity in relation to his negativist critical epistemology and his subtle account of the distinction between true and false needs. What emerges is an understanding of work that can guide our aspirations for the future of work, and one we illustrate via discussions of creative work and care work. These are types of work which (...) cater to persistent human needs, albeit ones that are distorted under present social conditions. Adorno’s thought helps us to understand why this is the case. (shrink)

Given his view that the modern world is ‘radically evil’, Adorno is an unlikely contributor to business ethics. Despite this, we argue that his work has a number of provocative implications for the field that warrant wider attention. Adorno regards our social world as damaged, unfree, and false and we draw on this critique to outline why the achievement of good work is so rare in contemporary society, focusing in particular on the ethical demands of roles and the ideological nature (...) of management’s self-understanding. Nevertheless, we show that Adorno’s comments on activities such as art and philosophy mean that it is possible to draw on his work in a way that contributes constructively to the conversation about good and meaningful work within business ethics. (shrink)

The notion that business organizations are akin to Aristotelian political communities has been a central feature of research into virtue ethics in business. In this article, I begin by outlining this “community thesis” and go on to argue that psychological research into the “just world fallacy” presents it with a significant challenge. The just world fallacy undermines our ability to implement an Aristotelian conception of justice, to each as he or she is due, and imperils the relational equality required for (...) shared participation in communities. In the final section, I offer a description of what Aristotelian community might look like within organizations, and some suggestions about how it may be possible to resist the challenge posed by the just world fallacy. (shrink)

Jaakko Nevasto has offered a number of thoughtful criticisms of our attempt to show that Adorno’s work can fruitfully be brought to bear on topics in business ethics. After welcoming his constructive clarifications, we attempt to defuse Nevasto’s main objections and defend our application of Adorno, focusing in particular on the topics of moral epistemology, needs, and the possibility of genuine activity – and thus good work – within capitalist society.

This open access book provides an exploration of the consequences of the ontological differences between natural and social objects (sometimes described as objects of nature and objects of thought) in the workings of causal and agency relationships. One of its important and possibly original conclusions is that causal and agency relationships do not encompass all of the dependent relationships encountered in social life. The idea that social reality is contingent has been known (and largely undisputed) at least since Wittgenstein’s “On (...) Certainty”, but social science, and most notably economics has continued to operate on the basis of causal and agency theories borrowed or adapted from the natural sciences. This volume contains essays that retain and justify the partial or qualified use of this approach and essays that totally reject any use of causal and agency theory built on determined facts (closed systems).The rejection is based on the possibly original claim that, whereas causation in the objects of the natural sciences reside in their properties, human action is a matter of intentionality. It engages with critical realist theory and re-examines the role of free will in theories of human action in general and economic theory in particular. (shrink)

В статті послідовно обгрунтовано твердження про позаконтекстуальний характер метафізичного знання. Доведено, що метафізика як знання граничного рівня абстракції детермінує контекст, що надає їй статус чистої теорії про універсальні сутнісні основи існування та пізнання світу. Також метафізика як спекулятивний рівень граничних абстракцій визначає загальний контур реалізації та здійснення культури, від конкретно-історичного тлумачення яких залежить зміст культурного простору існування людини. Висловлено гіпотезу, що метафізика культури акцентує константні принципи специфіки людського буття, а ефективність та дієвість рефлексії феномену культури здійснюється шляхом визначення основоположного для (...) певної епохи діалектичного протиріччя. Відповідно, метафізика є вираженою смисловою конструкцією культури, яка продукує певний тип мислення, пам’яті та ідентифікації, тобто суб’єктивності; та соціальності як етико-аксіологічної моделі взаємодії з Іншим. Аргументовано, що класична метафізика з моменту її виникнення і протягом усього довгого, змістовного та продуктивного існування є своєрідною орієнтацією у просторі. Автор доводить, що культура – це збір простору в інтелігібельній конструкції, специфічний характер людського буття у Всесвіті, спосіб перебування людини у світі. Простір у метафізиці культури означає область локалізації «Его» і поле трансценденції одночасно. Аргументовано, що метафізика через простір культури дозволяє емпірично відчувати Всесвіт як Єдине, припускати наявність сенсу. Визначено поняття метафізики культури як сфери філософського дослідження феномену культури в її граничних, позадосвідних, сутніснісних принципах історичного розвитку та смислових трансформацій. На основі проведеного аналізу автор резюмує визначення феномену культури як специфічно людського способу освоєння простору та підкорення часу, а свідомості - як топології рефлексивних практик. (shrink)

This article consistently elaborates the extra‐contextual nature of metaphysical knowledge. Metaphysicsis seen as a semantic construction of culture that produces a certain type of thinking, memory, and identification: that is, subjectivity, and sociality as an ethical and axiological model of interaction with the world and the Other. The paper argues that metaphysics is a kind of orientation in space and that culture is a semiotic way of world orientation, or collection of spaces into an intelligible structure, a specific characteristic of (...) human existence in the universe. Indeed, metaphysics through the space of culture allows one to experience the universe empirically as unity, to assume the presence of meaning. Based on the analysis, the paper summarizes the definition of the phenomenon of culture as a specifically human way of mastering space and controlling time, consciousness as a topology of reflective practices, and virtual reality technology as a space of pure metaphysics. (shrink)

In this paper, I assess some recent critical realist constructive criticisms of Theodor Adorno, one of the leading thinkers of the Frankfurt School tradition of critical theory. I argue that while there are similarities between Adorno’s treatment of causality and the critical realist notion of powers, these connections should not be taken to imply that Adorno’s conception of critique requires a critical realist powers ontology. I show that Bhaskar’s transcendental realism is at odds with the basic commitments of Adorno’s historical (...) materialism. I go on to clarify such materialism and show that to Adorno, capital is the historical compulsion characteristic of modernity. (shrink)