Human Flourishing, Normativity and Critical Theory

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
A. Bielskis
{"title":"Human Flourishing, Normativity and Critical Theory","authors":"A. Bielskis","doi":"10.15388/problemos.2023.103.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aristotle has traditionally been aligned with conservative social and political philosophy. The conservative reception has been challenged by Alasdair MacIntyre and the Marx-inspired reading of Aristotle. Following MacIntyre’s arguments, this paper sketches an alternative conception of the critical theory beyond the Frankfurt School’s critique of the contemporary culture and the modern society. Critical theory is understood as an attempt to provide both historical analysis and normative critique of the contemporary society and its culture. It argues that normativity should be understood not in Kantian, but in Aristotelian terms. The articulation of Aristotelian conceptions of human flourishing and aretē, rather than that of the bürgerlich conception of Kantian duty, should be at the centre of contemporary theorising. The author claims that Aristotle’s practical philosophy allows us to conceptualise ethics beyond the dominant conceptions of ethical normativity prevalent in the capitalist modernity, while Marx is important because his analysis provides us with theoretical tools for the historically informed critique of the social and economic structures of the modern society.","PeriodicalId":41448,"journal":{"name":"Problemos","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Problemos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/problemos.2023.103.2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aristotle has traditionally been aligned with conservative social and political philosophy. The conservative reception has been challenged by Alasdair MacIntyre and the Marx-inspired reading of Aristotle. Following MacIntyre’s arguments, this paper sketches an alternative conception of the critical theory beyond the Frankfurt School’s critique of the contemporary culture and the modern society. Critical theory is understood as an attempt to provide both historical analysis and normative critique of the contemporary society and its culture. It argues that normativity should be understood not in Kantian, but in Aristotelian terms. The articulation of Aristotelian conceptions of human flourishing and aretē, rather than that of the bürgerlich conception of Kantian duty, should be at the centre of contemporary theorising. The author claims that Aristotle’s practical philosophy allows us to conceptualise ethics beyond the dominant conceptions of ethical normativity prevalent in the capitalist modernity, while Marx is important because his analysis provides us with theoretical tools for the historically informed critique of the social and economic structures of the modern society.
人的繁荣、规范性与批判理论
亚里士多德传统上与保守的社会和政治哲学保持一致。保守主义的接受受到了阿拉斯代尔·麦金太尔和受马克思启发阅读亚里士多德的挑战。根据麦金太尔的观点,本文在法兰克福学派对当代文化和现代社会的批判之外,勾勒出一个批判理论的替代概念。批判理论被理解为试图对当代社会及其文化进行历史分析和规范批判。它认为规范性不应该用康德来理解,而应该用亚里士多德的术语来理解。亚里士多德关于人类繁荣和aretı的概念的阐述,而不是康德责任的bürgerlich概念,应该是当代理论的核心。作者认为,亚里士多德的实践哲学使我们能够超越资本主义现代性中普遍存在的伦理规范性的主导概念来对伦理进行概念化,而马克思之所以重要,是因为他的分析为我们提供了对现代社会的社会和经济结构进行历史性批判的理论工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Problemos
Problemos PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信