Now and then I get fed up with the action based ethics of modernity. What about the more holistic view of the Aristotelian virtue ethics? Where is the “person” in the (post)modern discourse about identities and actions? Does fragmented identities have to mean fragmented persons, and if not, what’s the relation?
By the way, there is no way of using the word virtuous in the Swedish language without sounding pious. There is knowledge - which is about the same as episteme, rational knowledge - and there is different kinds of practical knowledge. But where is the sense of wholeness? It’s not so strange that we are talking about fragmented identities when don’t even have a sound word for ‘knowledge’. And I guess English is in the same situation….






PeterGiger.SE




0 Responses to “What about the person?”