Perfectionism is a new player in the field of political philosophy. It is often rejected by liberal philosophers for it seems to have a conservative or paternalist bias. However, this paper argues first that perfectionism can have different political tendencies: it can be both liberal and illiberal, equalizing or anti-egalitarian, and be based on both limited or open conceptions of human nature. So perfectionism is not intrinsically conservative. Secondly, the paper aims to show that a strong case can be made (...) for a liberal and egalitarian perfectionism, based on a rereading of Karl Marx. From this perspective it is not only unnecessary to criticize perfectionism from a liberal or egalitarian perspective, perfectionism may also help in justifying liberal egalitarianism in a new way. (shrink)

Henning's Philosophy after Marx recapitulates the history of Marx-interpretations as a history of misinterpretation. Illustrating how Marx's original theories are more sustainable than their critiques from sociology, economics or philosophy, the work culminates in a criticism of recent critical theories.

This comment on Kocyba's article discusses both his economic and moral assumptions, arguing that the shift from industrial capitalism towards a 'new spirit' of more autonomous forms of work is not captured by Kocyba's comparison between producing things alone and creating services together. Consequently, the main problem is not, as Kocyba believes, the determination of an individual's share in the (intangible) product, but the competitive mindset of this new spirit, which has many undesired consequences. Concerning the 'moral presuppositions' it is (...) argued that the questionable self-restriction to 'immanent norms' induces a strong affirmative tendency which is at odds with Kocyba's critical aspirations. The idea that critical theory can only refer to norms which are already institutionalized needs to be dropped in order to revive the critical dimension. It is argued that Kocyba is already half way there and needs to make this break more explicit. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie Jahrgang: 65 Heft: 1 Seiten: 130-143.

Als Theorie des Guten fordert der Perfektionismus eine gelingende menschliche Entwicklung; als politische Philosophie stellt er Institutionen die Aufgabe, die Entfaltung der Individuen zu ermöglichen. Eine solche Politik steht heute allerdings unter liberalem Generalverdacht. Christoph Henning stellt die Debatten um den Perfektionismus erstmals umfassend dar und zeigt im Rückgriff auf radikale Denker von Jean-Jacques Rousseau bis Thomas Hurka, dass der Perfektionismus als zentraler Bestandteil des Projektes von Freiheit und Gleichheit zu begreifen ist.

Recent welfare reform has resulted in new work requirements for welfare recipients. These measures need to be justified, as they impair recipients’ freedom. This paper first repudiates economic justifications for these developments and argues that the dominant justification is perfectionist. But unlike workfare, perfectionism is not necessarily paternalistic. The second part of the paper outlines a liberal perfectionism which allows only for autonomy-enhancing politics. Though even such autonomy-enhancing politics cannot be made obligatory. The last section concludes that workfare’s paternalism cannot (...) be attributed to perfectionist justifications, but rather stems from the narrow philosophy of work that is applied. The idea that enforced wage labour is a reliable tool for inducing autonomy is refuted. In the end, workfare needs to be rejected, as it is based on assumptions that are mistaken both normatively and empirically. (shrink)

The paper argues that for a full-blown perfectionist theory to rely on liberal individualism and an ethics of sociality is not enough. In order to be consistent, an objective theory of the human good also needs to take human nature into account. In a first step this is shown by an analysis of George Sher′s important book, where human nature is lost underway . A second step traces a viable theory of human nature in the progressive tradition of both radical (...) enlightenment and American progressivism . It is argued that this theory can be defended against postmodern criticism and carries a strong egalitarian current. (shrink)

This essay describes a problem, that German protestant theology has faced for nearly a hundred years. The problem derives from a theory of death, which spread among theologians in the first decades of the 20th century. In contradiction to traditional doctrine they interpreted death not as the moment, when the immortal soul seperates from the body, but as the moment in time, when human life comes to its absolute end. That means, they denied the idea of an immortal soul. Accordingly (...) they interpreted the resurrection of the dead as a radically new creation. This theory, named Ganztodtheorie, caused an unsolvable problem, that can be described as follows: How can one be sure, that it is exactely he, who becomes resurrected and not a newly created double? Christian Henning discusses the answers to this question, that had been given by Carl Stange, Paul Althaus, Werner Elert, Karl Barth, Eberhard Jüngel and Wolfhard Pannenberg and finally presents his own solution. In doing so he modifies the traditional idea of the immortality of the soul. (shrink)