This book offers a major reinterpretation of the `secularization' of medieval ideas by examining scholastic discussions on the nature of the common good. It challenges the view that the rediscovery of Aristotle was the primary catalyst for the emergence of a secular theory of the state. A detailed exposition of the content and the context of late scholastic political and ethical thought reveals that the roots of medieval 'secularization' were profoundly theological.

As one of the early Enlightenment philosophers in England, John Locke sought to bring reason and critical intelligence to the discussion of the origins of civil society. Endeavoring to reconstruct the nature and purpose of government, a social contract theory is proposed. The Second Treatise sets forth a detailed discussion of how civil society came to be and the nature of its inception. Locke's discussion of tacit consent, separation of powers, and the right of citizens to revolt against repressive governments, (...) has made The Second Treatise one of the most influential essays in the history of political philosophy. (shrink)

The Common Good and Christian Ethics rethinks the ancient tradition of the common good in a way that addresses contemporary social divisions, both urban and global. David Hollenbach draws on social analysis, moral philosophy, and theological ethics to chart new directions in both urban life and global society. He argues that the division between the middle class and the poor in major cities and the challenges of globalisation require a new commitment to the common good and that both believers and (...) secular people must move towards new forms of solidarity if they are to live good lives together. Hollenbach proposes a positive vision of how a reconstructed understanding of the common good can lead to better lives for all today, both in cities and globally. This interdisciplinary study makes both practical and theoretical contributions to the developing shape of social, cultural, and religious life today. (shrink)

This study explores the meaning of the common good and the prospects for pursuing it in a liberal society. Three aims characterize the investigation. First and most generally, it outlines a theoretical synthesis of liberalism and communitarianism. Second, it presents Jacques Maritain's Catholic common good theory as one successful example of such a synthesis. Third and most specifically, it argues that religion is an essential component of the common good for a liberal society. This argument concretely demonstrates how a liberal (...) society can benefit from the political and social contributions that citizens make as members of particular communities. The study begins by drawing resources for a contemporary theory of communal liberalism from John Locke and Moses Mendelssohn, whose liberalisms relied on religious sources. It turns then to modern liberalism, which, in the work of John Rawls, constrains religious argument and practice by placing unjustified conditions on religious speech in politics. Michael Sandel, a critic of Rawls, points a way toward mediating liberalism and communitarianism, but his approach remains inadequate. The study turns to Maritan, whose account of the common good proceeds as both a natural law argument and a theological argument. His theory is shown to mediate both methodological and substantive theory sees religion, Catholic Christianity in particular, making three contributions to the common good: intellectual resources that assist the public's reflection on political matters; conditions that promote social harmony among citizens of differing worldviews; and arguments that draw the public's attention to personal and social goods that are often neglected in politics. A comparison with Rawls and Sandel shows that Maritan successfully articulates a theory of communal liberalism. The thesis concludes by applying Maritan's substantive political philosophy to the moral/political problem of abortion, in order to show how common good principles can guide a pluralistic society to points of consensus in the often contentious debate over this issue. (shrink)

This paper is an insighful critique of the shareholder and stakeholder models of organizational purpose. The authors emphasize that both these models fail to serve as an adequate basis for explaining the purpose of an organization and are unable to capture a fuller meaning of living in an organizational community. The paper thus endeavours to introduce into the mainstream of discussion a third model, based on the idea of the common good which draws inspiration from the communitarian Catholic tradition. The (...) first part of this paper traces the idea of common good as it relates to organizations. The second part engages the common good tradition with the shareholder and stake holder models. The paper goes on to describe common good within the organization through three propositions: fundamentality, excellence and integration. The authors reiterate, however, that the idea of the common good does not provide a micro-blueprint for managers, but rather an orientation or moral compass that directs organizational activity towards human development. (shrink)

Presenting with moving insight the relations between man, as a person and as an individual, and the society of which he is a part, Maritain's treatment of a lasting topic speaks to this generation as well as those to come. Maritain employs the personalism rooted in Aquinas's doctrine to distinguish between social philosophy centered in the dignity of the human person and that centered in the primacy of the individual and the private good.

Abstract:This paper investigates the broad ideological conflict between world views on corporate culture. Two views are identified: one encompassing standard liberal economic philosophy; the other taking broader notions of corporate culture from ethics theory. The conflict that surrounded the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle is used as an illustration of the current conflict between these views. The writings of Alasdair MacIntyre are employed as a means of elucidating and reconciling these two world views.

Although Professor Lewin is not testing existing views that, for people in politics, 'egoism rules' on deep theoretical grounds, he strongly argues that empirical facts do not support such views and thus opens a new chapter in the debate on ...