Aristotelian Phronêsis, the Discourse of Human Rights, and Contemporary Global Practice

Bibliographic Data

ID6107970
AuthorsStephen Salkever (1 Department of Political Science, Bryn Mawr College 101 N. Merion Ave., Bryn Mawr, pa 19010 USA [email protected]), Stephen G Salkever (Bryn Mawr College, corresponding author)
Year2016
Volume33
Issue1
Pages7-30
Publication date2016-04-15
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolis The Journal for Ancient Greek and Roman Political Thought (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0142-257X • E-ISSN: 2051-2996
PublisherWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1163/20512996-12340071
OpenAlexW804251631
LanguageEN
References cited18

This essay outlines some fundamental differences between the evaluative and explanatory language of Aristotelian practical reason based on his empirical psychological theory of human development, on the one hand, and the late 20th and 21st century discourse of human rights based on a NeoKantian transcendent principle of universal human dignity on the other. To what extent are these two types of political discourse compatible in today’s globalizing world? To the extent that they are not compatible, which should be preferred? My answer is that they are compatible and even complementary, but only if the Aristotelian framework is treated as more fundamental, and the rights-and-dignity perspective is understood as a potentially good political solution, for the time being, in the contemporary context of global politics

Context (archaeology · Dignity · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Human rights · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Politics · Social science · Sociology · Ethics in medical practice · History · Law · Mathematics · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub