Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| The Good: The word "good" can have many different applications, but in general it refers to something that is morally right, ethical, or beneficial. It can also be used to describe something that is pleasant, desirable, or enjoyable. Philosophy is particularly concerned with the difficulties of defining the good. See also Definitions, Definability._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Martha Nussbaum on Good - Dictionary of Arguments
Brocker I 895 Good/the Good/Nussbaum: "strong vague conception of the good": VsNussbaum: the critique of it essentially refers to its Aristotle interpretation and the question of the essentialism of its conception of the good (Sturma 2000)(1). >Essentialism, cf. >Aristotle, >The Good/Aristotle. 2. VsNussbaum: Furthermore, it is about an implicit tension between a vague theory of the good, which wants to know a wide scope of decision guaranteed for the actual exercise of the basic cabilities, and a certain conception richer in content, which orients itself at the actual functioning ("true human functioning").(2)(3)(4) 1. Dieter Sturma, »Universalismus und Neoaristotelismus. Amartya Sen und Martha C. Nussbaum über Ethik und soziale Gerechtigkeit«, in: Wolfgang Kersting (Hg.), Politische Philosophie des Sozialstaats, Weilerswist 2000, 257-292. 2. Anne Phillips »Feminism and Liberalism Revisited. Has Martha Nussbaum Got it Right?«, in: Constellations 8/2, 2001, 249-266. 3 . Nikita Dhawan »Zwischen Empire und Empower. Dekolonisierung und Demokratisierung«, in: Femina Politica 2, 2009, 52-63 4. Ian Carter, »Is the Capability Approach Paternalist?«, in: Economics and Philosophy 30/1, 2014, 75-98. Sandra Seubert, „Martha C. Nussbaum, Women and Human Development (2000)“, in:Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018_____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
||
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-16