Response: Making Yourself Useful
In this essay I reply to Stanley Hauerwas' reading of my book, Life as We Know It, by way of engaging Hauerwas' critique of Enlightenment humanism, and, more specifically, the Kantian categorical imperative. I argue that Hauerwas is mistaken to claim that “humanism cannot help but think th...
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | 電子 Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| 出版: |
Routledge
2005
|
| In: |
Journal of religion, disability & health
Year: 2005, 卷: 8, 發布: 3/4, Pages: 31-36 |
| Further subjects: | B
Disability
B Autonomy B Dependency B Humanism |
| 在線閱讀: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| 總結: | In this essay I reply to Stanley Hauerwas' reading of my book, Life as We Know It, by way of engaging Hauerwas' critique of Enlightenment humanism, and, more specifically, the Kantian categorical imperative. I argue that Hauerwas is mistaken to claim that “humanism cannot help but think that, all things considered, it would be better if [the mentally handicapped] did not exist,” even as I agree in part with his trenchant critique of my own work and of the widely-accepted Kantian proposition that human beings should treat each other as ends in themselves, never as means to an end. Finally, I defend my antifoundationalist formulation of moral “obligation” with regard to persons with mental disabilities against Hauerwas's Christian critique thereof by noting that even Hauerwas, at a critical juncture of his argument, relies on a pragmatist, antifoundationalist understanding of what it means to “help” other humans-and what it means to make oneself useful. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1522-9122 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of religion, disability & health
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1300/J095v08n03_04 |