Aristotle, Kant, and the Stoics: Rethinking Happiness and Duty

by Stephen Engstrom, Jennifer Whiting

Overview

This major collection of essays offers the first serious challenge to the traditional view that ancient and modern ethics are fundamentally opposed. In doing so it has important implications for contemporary ethical thought, as well as providing a significant reassessment of the work of Aristotle, Kant and the Stoics. The contributors include internationally recognized interpreters of ancient and modern ethics.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780521624978
Publisher:	Cambridge University Press
Publication date:	04/13/1998
Edition description:	New Edition
Pages:	324
Product dimensions:	5.98(w) x 8.98(h) x 1.18(d)

Table of Contents

Part I. Deliberation and Moral Development: 1. Deliberation and moral development in Aristotle's ethics John McDowell; 2. Making room for character Barbara Herman; Part II. Eudaimonism: 3. Kant's criticisms of Eudaimonism T. H. Irwin; 4. Happiness and the highest good in Aristotle and Kant Stephen Engstrom; Part III. Self-Love and Self-Worth: 5. Self-love, self-benevolence, and self-conceit Allen W. Wood; 6. Self-love and authoritative virtue: Prolegomenon to a Kantian reading of Eudemian Ethics VIII 3 Jennifer Whiting; Part IV. Practical Reason and Moral Psychology: 7. From duty and for the sake of the noble: Kant and Aristotle on morally good action Christine M. Korsgaard; 8. Aristotle and Kant on morality and practical reasoning Julia Annas; Part V. Stoicism: 9. Eudaimonism, the appeal to nature, and 'Moral Duty' in Stoicism John M. Cooper; 10. Kant and Stoic ethics J. B. Schneewind.

Editorial Reviews

'Importantly, old stereotypes, or conventional wisdom, about the differences between ancient and modern ethics, especially between Aristotle and Kant, are challenged, exposing possible unities (and historical influences) that tradition has overlooked. However, superficial similarities are also probed and sometimes shown to mask deep remaining differences. The papers call attention to, as well as represent, a quite remarkable contemporary revival of important philosophical/scholarly treatment of the history of ethics, and the authors are, without exception, major players in this movement.' Thomas E. Hill, Jr, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

From the Publisher