Natural Law and the Ethics of Discourse

Ratio Juris 12 (4):354-373 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This essay argues that Plato's critical analysis of the ethics of discourse is superior to Habermas', and more generally that Habermas has no sufficient reason to propose or suppose the philosophical superiority of “modernity.” The failure of Hume and Kant and much modern philosophy to understand the concept and content of reasons for action underlies Habermas' attempted distinction between ethics and morality, and Rawls' concept of public reason. A proper study of discourse also yields a metaphysics of the person, and thus reinforces the ethics.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,369

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
77 (#273,902)

6 months
12 (#308,345)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Finnis
Oxford University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references