BLWith new text and full apparatus criticus The Eudemian Ethics was one of two ethical treatises which Aristotle wrote on the subject of ethica or `matters to do with character'. Although the two works cover much the same ground, the Nicomachean Ethics is better known; the poor manuscript tradition of the Eudemian Ethics has made correct translation and interpretation of the text extremely difficult. The subject of the work is the choice of a certain means of conduct, made by a (...) `man of practical wisdom', between two extremes of behaviour: asceticism and yielding to uncontrolled impulses. Aristotle also stresses the notion of moral intention and the importance of virtue of character. This new Oxford Classical Text of the Eudemian Ethics is the result of many years of work. After Sir David Ross's death, his original text was substantially reworked and revised by his friend and colleague R. R. Walzer, who was aided in the revision by his former pupil Mrs Jean Mingay, who continued his work after his death in 1974. Mrs Mingay was fortunate in being able to make use of previously unpublished contributions from D. J. Allan after his death in the late seventies, and more recently has been helped in her work by the suggestions of Professor D. A. Russell, David Robinson, and Christopher Rowe. (shrink)

BLWith new text and full apparatus criticusThe Eudemian Ethics was one of two ethical treatises which Aristotle wrote on the subject of ethica or `matters to do with character'. Although the two works cover much the same ground, the Nicomachean Ethics is better known; the poor manuscript tradition of the Eudemian Ethics has made correct translation and interpretation of the text extremely difficult. The subject of the work is the choice of a certain means of conduct, made by a `man (...) of practical wisdom', between two extremes of behaviour: asceticism and yielding to uncontrolled impulses. Aristotle also stresses the notion of moral intention and the importance of virtue of character. This new Oxford Classical Text of the Eudemian Ethics is the result of many years of work. After Sir David Ross's death, his original text was substantially reworked and revised by his friend and colleague R. R. Walzer, who was aided in the revision by his former pupil Mrs Jean Mingay, who continued his work after his death in 1974. Mrs Mingay was fortunate in being able to make use of previously unpublished contributions from D. J. Allan after his death in the late seventies, and more recently has been helped in her work by the suggestions of Professor D. A. Russell, David Robinson, and Christopher Rowe. (shrink)

Contents: Introduction, Bibliography On the Sects for Beginners An Outline of Empiricism On Medical Experience Index of the Persons Mentioned in the Texts Index of the Subjects Mentioned in the Texts.

Multiculturalism and “The Politics of Recognition.” An Essay by Charles Taylor with commentary by Amy Gutmann, editor, Steven C. Rockefeller, Michael Walzer, and Susan Wolf.

In this article, I present a two-pronged argument for the immorality of contemporary, asymmetric drone warfare, based on my new interpretations of the just war principles of “proportionality” and “moral equivalence of combatants” (MEC). The justification for these new interpretations is that drone warfare continues to this day, having survived despite arguments against it that are based on traditional interpretations of just war theory (including one from Michael Walzer). On the basis of my argument, I echo Harry Van der (...) Linden’s call for “an international treaty banning all weaponized UAV [uninhabited aerial vehicles].”. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:CHARITY LOST: TBE SECtJLA'.RIZATfON OF THE PRINCIPLE OF DOUBLE EFFECT IN THE JUST-WAR TRADITION TIMOTHY M. RENICK Georgia State University Atlanta, Georgia 0 N AUGUST 12, 1945, the city of Hiroshima still smoldered, and President Harry Truman addressed the American people : We have used [the atomic bomb] against those who have attacked us without warning at Pearl Harbor, against those who have starved and beaten and executed American (...) prisoners of war, against those who have abandoned all pretense of obeying international laws of warfare. We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war.1 Truman and his military advisers had made a calculation. Japan was preparing for a last-ditch defense of the Japanese Islands. The prospect was ominous, to say the least. The United States had suffered eighty thousand casualties in the taking of the smaller and less protected Okinawa just two months earlier; 120,000 Japanese soldiers had been killed (and only ten-thousand taken prisoner). Strategists estimated that losses, both military and civilian, from a full scale battle for Japan itself would exceed one million. Surely the tens of thousands killed by exploding a bomb over Hiroshima was the lesser evil. Surely this was a proportionate act : fifty thousand lives traded for a million. As Winston Churchill wrote in support of Truman's decision: "To avert a vast, indefinite butchery... at the cost of a few explosions seemed, after all our toils and perils, a miracle of deliverance." 2 1 Michael Walzer, lust and Unjust Wars (New York: Basic Books, 1979), p.164. 2 Ibid., pp. 266-267. 441 442 TIMOTHY M. RENICK From an ethical perspective, however, the act was anything but a deliverance. I am not alone in this assessment. Advocates of the just-war tradition including Elizabeth Anscombe, Paul Ramsey, George Kennan, John Langan, and Michael Walzer have condemned the bombing of Hiroshima by means of a shared just-war argument.8 The argument goes as follows, and it is a good one. In times of war, many actions are likely to have both good and evil effects. One destroys an enemy's munitions factory (good effect) but kills an innocent child in the process (evil effect). The jus in bello of the just-war tradition, however, stipulates that an action which has a " double effect " is permissible if and only if: ( 1) it is discriminate (i.e., the actor aims only at the good effect and does not intend the evil effect, nor is the evil effect a means to the end, however good); and (2) it is proportionate (i.e., the good created by the act outweighs the bad).4 Now, the argument continues, Truman's decision to bomb Hiroshima failed the first criterion. It was not a discriminate act because the evil effect (the killing of tens of thousands of Japanese civilians) was not unintended. In fact, the evil was the very means to the good end. Although Truman himself claimed to have selected Hiroshima as a target because it was "a war s See, for example, G. E. M. Anscombe, "Mr. Truman's Decision," in Ethics, Religion and Politics (Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota, 1981); M. Walzer "Supreme Emergency," in Just and Unjust Wars; and John Langan, "The American Hierarchy and Nuclear Weapons," Theological Studies 43 (1982) : 447-467. ' I utilize here a helpful shorthand version of the principle of double effect introduced by Paul Ramsey in War and the Christian Conscience (Durham, North Carolina: Duke, 1961). More frequently, the principle is rendered by means of four criteria: It is permissible to perform an act likely to have evil consequences if and only if (I) the act is good in itself or at least indifferent; (2) the direct effect is morally justified; (3) the actor aims only at the acceptable effect and does not intend the evil effect, nor is the evil effect a means to the end, however good ; and (4) there is in the good effect a proportionately grave reason for permitting the evil effect. The shortened version of the theory captures all components essential to my discussion and enhances clarity. I thus will make use of it throughout this essay. CHARITY AND... (shrink)

The Ethics of War is an indispensable collection of essays addressing issues both timely and age-old about the nature and ethics of war. Features essays by great thinkers from ancient times through to the present day, among them Plato, Augustine, Aquinas, Machiavelli, Grotius, Kant, Russell, and Walzer Examines timely questions such as: When is recourse to arms morally justifiable? What moral constraints should apply to military conduct? How can a lasting peace be achieved? Will appeal to a broad range (...) of readers interested in morality and ethics in war time Includes informative introductions and helpful marginal notes by editors. (shrink)

In the seminal Just and Unjust Wars, Michael Walzer famously considered the ethics of modern warfare, examining the moral issues that arise before, during, and after conflict. However, Walzer and subsequent scholars have often limited their analyses of the ethics of combat to soldiers on the ground and failed to recognize the moral responsibilities of senior political and military leaders. In Just War Reconsidered: Strategy, Ethics, and Theory, James M. Dubik draws on years of research as well as (...) his own experiences as a soldier and teacher to fill the gaps left by other theorists. He applies moral philosophy, political philosophy, and strategic studies to historical and contemporary case studies to reveal the inaccuracies and moral bankruptcy that inform some of the literature on military ethics. Conventional just war theory adopts a binary approach, wherein political leaders have moral accountability for the decision to go to war and soldiers have accountability for fighting the war ethically. Dubik argues, however, that political and military leadership should be held accountable for the planning and execution of war in addition to the decision to initiate conflict. Dubik bases his sober reassessment on the fundamental truth that war risks the lives of soldiers and innocents as well as the political and social health of communities. He offers new standards to evaluate the ethics of warfare in the hope of increasing the probability that the lives of soldiers will not be used in vain and the innocent not put at risk unnecessarily."--Provided by publisher. (shrink)

This anthology brings together material on two major related topics: the military profession, and morality and war. The revised and updated edition retains those sections that made the original version indispensable in the classroom, while incorporating new selections on topics of special concern for the 1980s and beyond. In particular, Colonel Wakin has included essays focusing on the relevance of nuclear deterrence and “just war” theory in the nuclear age. More than a third of the chapters are new.The articles in (...) the first section stress the ethical dimensions of the military profession, considering topics such as the conflict between military values and societal norms, the relation of the military to the state, and the concepts of loyalty, honor, and integrity. New chapters include an essay by Vice Admiral James B. Stockdale suggesting how moral philosophy can serve the profession, contemporary commentaries on the profession by Jacques Barzun and Max Lerner, and new thoughts on ethics and leadership by Colonel Wakin.The essays in Part 2 confront the agonizing moral issues associated with warfare, especially modern warfare. In conjunction with discussions of the laws of war and war crimes, new chapters highlight the continuing debate on nuclear issues. Included are excerpts from the U.S. Catholic Bishops’ pastoral letter, “The Challenge of Peace: God’s Promise and Our Response’’; a defense of pacifism by Stanley Hauerwas; arguments about the use of nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence by Michael Walzer, Michael Novak, and Charles Krauthammer; and some moral reflections on the Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars’’) by Kenneth Kemp. (shrink)

Most accounts of immigration ethics implicitly rely upon neoclassical migration theory, which understands migration as the result of poverty and unemployment in sending countries. This paper argues that neoclassical migration theory assumes an account of the human person as solely an autonomous rational agent which then leads to ethics of migration which overemphasize freedom and self-determination. This tendency to assume that migration works as neoclassical migration theory describes is shared by political philosophers, such as Joseph Carens, Michael Walzer, and (...) David Miller. This paper argues that all three philosophers incorrectly frame migration as a contest between the freedom of the migrant and the communal self-determination of the political community. Migration systems theory is presented as a theory that draws upon a relationally embedded understanding of autonomy in order to begin to develop a migration systems ethics. This paper concludes by arguing that the central ethical category for an ethics of migration is not freedom or self-determination, but justice-in-relation. (shrink)

Aus dem Inhalt: Justice in General: E. Attwooll: Is the Idea of Justice Asymmetric? u C. L. Sheng: Injustice in Law Caused by Conflict between Equality and Equity u G. Barden: Approaches to Justice: The Economy and the State u C. Schmidt: The Concept of Justice in Economic Theory u M. Milde: Rawls, Pluralism and the Value of Contract Theory u J. Tasioulas: M. Walzer on Justice u L. Cedroni: An Ethological Approach to Law, Justice and the State uaR. (...) Kevelson: Justice as Artifice and Sign u A. Makolkin: Semiotics and Poeticity of Law and Justice u D. Ginev: Law and Morality from a Hermeneutic-Semiotic Perspective Rights in General: F. Viola: Personal Identity in the Human Rights Perspective u J.-R. Sieckmann: Justice and Rights u P. Comanducci: Justice and Rights u D. Wayand: Aboriginal Rights - Then and Now u M. Pavcnik: Argument der Grundrechte u D. B. Boersema: What's Wrong with Rights? u E. E. Dais: A Kantian Critique of Justice Holmes's Rights Theory Social and Environmental Rights: B. M. Baker: The Welfare State: Objectives, Subordinate Principles and Justifying Grounds u U. Penski: Zur Begruendung und Struktur sozialer Rechte u H. LaFolette: Two Forms of Paternalism u L. J. Mazor: Social Justice / Asocial Injustice u D. Wood: Constitutional Minimalism and the Discretionary Power of the Welfare State u u.a. (shrink)

Reviewed Work: Multiculturalism and "The Politics of Recognition" by Charles Taylor, Amy Gutmann, Steven C. Rockefeller, Michael Walzer, Susan Wolf.

M. Walzer considère que la philosophie, portée à constituer des propositions universelles, ne parvient pas à penser le pluralisme des voies démocratiques. La conception théorique qu’elle se fait de la démocratie est ce qu’il appelle un universalisme surplombant, extérieur aux réalités auxquelles il doit s’appliquer. Cet article vise à montrer d’une part que Walzer ne distingue pas suffisamment la constitution des propositions philosophiques et la question de la normativité de ces propositions, d’autre part que la construction philosophique de (...) la démocratie tente le plus souvent d’éviter de tomber dans l’universalisme surplombant. (shrink)

Cet essai sur Michael Walzer, l'un des chefs de file du communautarisme américain, se présente comme une discussion critique de la conception spécifiquement communautarienne de l'auteur des ¤¤Sphères de justice¤¤. Pour le philosophe et ethicien M. Hunyadi le modèle de Walzer s'avère impuissant à relever un défi comme le multiculturalisme.

Neither M. Walzer's collectivist conception of the "moral equality" of combatants, nor its antithetical individualist conceptions of responsibility are compatible with the ethos of military professionalism and its conception(s) of the responsibility of military professionals for service in an unjust war.

J. van den Hoven suggested to analyse privacy from the perspective of informational justice, whereby he referred to the concept of distributive justice presented by M. Walzer in “ Spheres of Justice ”. In “privacy as contextual integrity” Helen Nissenbaum did also point to Walzer’s approach of complex equality as well to van den Hoven’s concept. In this article I will analyse the challenges of applying Walzer’s concept to issues of informational privacy. I will also discuss the (...) possibilities of framing privacy from the point of the “art of separation” by looking at the intersection of information infrastructures and institutions. (shrink)

Trust and corporation (extracts) / by F.W. Maitland -- Respublica Christiana -- by J.N. Figgis -- Society and state / by R.M. MacIver -- The discredited state / by E. Barker -- Conflicting social obligations / by G.D.H. Cole -- Community is a process / by M.P. Follett -- The eruption of the group / by E. Barker -- The masses in a representative democracy / by M. Oakeshott -- The atavism of social justice / by F.A. von Hayek -- (...) Collective entities and moral rights / by V. van Dyke -- Capitalism, citizenship and community / by S. Macedo -- Liberalism and the politicization of ethnicity / by W. Kymlicka -- Are there any cultural rights? / by C. Kukathas -- The civil society argument / by M. Walzer. (shrink)

In this article the author tries to give an answer - from the point of view of the transcendental pragmatic foundation of discourse ethics - to the title question, which was raised by the Unesco conferences entitled `Universal Ethics' in Paris (27 March 1997) and Naples (December 1997). The article should be understood as a supplement to the empiristic-comparative responses of S. Bok and H. Küng, and especially to the communitarian approach of M. Walzer, proposed at the first conference. (...) Unlike traditional rationalism, this approach does not try to deduce concrete moral norms from axiomatic first principles; it begins with transcendental reflection on the undeniable moral presuppositions of argumentative discourse (which is not circumventable in philosophy). The approach first deduces from these presuppositions only the ideal procedures for the moral discourses through which all concrete moral problems ought to be solved, if possible. The second step provides a strategic-counter-strategic supplementation principle for those cases where undistorted moral discourses are not possible. (shrink)

[TofC cont.] Social ideals: Justice, A utilitarian theory of justice / J.S. Mill, Egalitarianism with changed motivation / G. Cohen; Equality, Multidimensional equality / M. Walzer, Equality of capacity / A. Sen; Liberty, rights, property, and self-ownership, A defense of the primacy of liberty rights / L. Lomasky, Atomism and the primacy of rights / C. Taylor -- Social institutions: Education, Educating about familial values / W. Galston, For vouchers and parental choice / M. Friedman; Family, In defense of (...) filial obligations / C.H. Sommers; Punishment, A utilitarian theory of punishment / J. Bentham. In [this book, the editors] provide students [with] a wide variety of readings covering the problems of political and social philosophy. Such topics as political obligation, democracy, rights, and justice are represented, in addition to less widely discussed subjects as the family. Both common approaches and those which are less familiar are presented, as well as recent developments in the topic area. -Back cover. (shrink)

La cuestión práctica más importante del relativismo ético es sin duda la legitimidad de las valoraciones morales respecto a sociedades con sistemas morales diferentes del sistema de quien emite el juido de valor. El comunitarismo de la última década1 representado en esta cuestión por M. Walzer ha cuestionado precisamente dicha legitimidad y ha abogado por un «enfoque interno» que parta de los criterios de que toda forma de vida es «correcta» si sevive «de manera fiel a las concepciones compartidas (...) por los miembros de la comunidad en cuestión»2, considerando que «no atender a los significados compartidos por nuestra comunidad es siempre obrar injustamente»3. Este particularismo radical adopta así un «enfoque interno» en el que el hecho mismo de la aceptación de determinados puntos de vista, opiniones y principios forma parte de la argumentación en defensa de una concepción moral específica, en contra del «enfoque externo» que mantiene la necesidad de prescindir de estos hechos. En esta última línea Hare, por ejemplo, ha rechazado que pueda demostrarse la inaceptabiidad de una teoría moral alegando su no adecuación a la opinión admitida, pues «las opiniones morales vigentes en un grupo social no tienen valor probatorio alguno en una filosofía moral cuya función es establecer cuestiones morales de alcauce universal. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 109 makes for much enjoyment in the reading; the historical and linguistic enquiries are often most rewarding; the weakest moments come when his hectoring of modern sceptics betrays an ignorance of relevant modern arguments. Generally the production is excellent, but on page 129, line 19, delete.... ; on page 185, line 17 and page 186, line 14, read ~p,~**for ~pcr Amherst College J O H NKING-FARLOW Greek (...) into Arabic: Essays on Islamic Philosophy. By Richard Wa}zer. (Cambridge, Mass.: Oriental Studies I, Harvard University Press, 1962. Pp. vi + 256. $11.00. English edition: Oxford, Bruno Cassirer. 63s.) Venu ~ l'islamologie des ~tudes classiques, M. Walzer s'est consacr~ depuis de longues annfies ~ ~tudier la tradition philosophique grecque au sein de la culture musulmane. Ses recherches ont vis~ soit ~trecouvrer sous une forme plus ou moins directe des d6bris de l'h6ritage philosophique et culturel grec perdus dans l'original, soit ~t 6clairer la survivance et l'adaptation de cet hfiritage classique chez les penseurs de l'Islam. Le volume en question rassemble quatorze 6tudes de l'auteur, toutes consacr~es ~ ce th~me sfiduisant, et parues au cours d'une trentaine d'ann6es dans diff~rents recueils et revues scientifiques: en commen~ant par un beau chapitre de synthbse (Islamic Philosophy), contribu~ ~ une histoire g~n6rale de la philosophie, et par l'autre figalement d'ensemble On the Legacy of the Classics in the Islamic World tir~ de la Festschrift pour Bruno Snell, suivis par un nombreux groupe de recherches particuli~res, pour la plus part r6dig~es en anglais, mais aussi en allemand et en italien. Six chapitres traitent de l'Aristote "arabe" (un fragment probablement de l'Eud~me recouvr~ dans al-Kindi, un ficho de dialogue aristot~lique ~p,~T~6~ retrouv~ dans un ouvrage d'adDailami, des comptes-rendus critiques sur tes 6ditions r6centes des versions arabes de l'Organon et de la Metaphysique, une fitude sur la place de la Rh6torique et de la Po~tique dans le m~me Organon, une autre encore sur les versions arabes d'Aristote dans les biblioth~ques d'Istanbul). Deux autres chapitres, fitroitement li~s entre eux, traitent de la philosophie morale de Galien, en puisant h un abr6g6 arabe de son perdu,~p~~0~u, qui trahit une influence platonique pass6e par Posidonius, et contient entre autre une diatrib~ qui rappelle une fable bien connue de Babrius. Les quatre derniers chapitres se rattachent par contre au second des deux courants d'~tudes que nous avons indiqu~s: ils 6tudient ~ la lumi~re de textes r~cemment publi6s la pens~e d'al-Kindi, le philosophe arabe mu'tazilite pour lequel la revelation et la philosophie aboutissaient au m~me but, ou la pens6e d'al-Farabi sur le proph~tisme et la divination, consid~r~es avec Platon comme res- 110 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY sortantes de l"'imagination," et partant subordonn&s toutes les deux ~ la sp&ulation rationnelle. Une autre &ude sur l'&hique de Miskawaih nous montre ce philosophe du X si&le parvenu ~ des positions harmonistiques entre la foi et la pens& rationnelle, qui se rapprochent de celles d'al-Kindi, et se d&achent de celles d'al-Farabi, Avicenne et Averro~s. Une lecture enfin sur Platonism in Islamic Philosophy nous montre chez ce m~me al-Farabi et d'autres penseurs musulmans la survivance et l'adaptation de la pens~e platonique dans ce qui a trait aux quatre vertus fondamentales, ~ l'Rtat idfial, ~ la valeur du proph&isme, et ~ la pri~re philosophique. I1 suffit de cette simple table des mati6res pour faire ressortir la vari&~ et l'importance des th~mes abord~s par l'auteur darts la vaste domaine de la philosophie gr&o-islamique, &helonn& ici dans une succession chronologique et id~ale. M. Walzer connak en maitre la technique philologique dans les deux champs, classique et arabe; mais il salt s'~lever de la philologie fi des probl~mes fondamentaux d'histoire de la pens& et de la culture. I1 r~ussit ~ d~gager tr~s adroitement la pens& des auteurs arabes de leur forme souvent obscure et compliqu&, ~ reconnaltre ce qui est essentiel dans la foule des d&ails, ~ caract~riser la physionomie intellectuelle des individus et ~ la replacer en mSme temps dans le... (shrink)

Scholars have generally held that Xenophon the Athenian favoured oligarchic constitutions and was therefore opposed to the Athenian democracy. Yet Xenophon's writings often seem to display remarkable sympathy for the democracy, and the issue is complicated by the difficulty of assigning any ancient author to a definite place on the political spectrum. Using the categories that M. Walzer employs to analyse modern social critics, this study finds that although Xenophon can take an external/rejectionist approach to the criticism of the (...) Athenian democracy, he more commonly takes an internal/immanent stance. Moreover, his works sometimes seem to express a sympathy for the democracy that extends beyond a patriotic desire for the betterment of his native city regardless of constitution to a solidarity with the foundational ideology of the democratic regime. This suggests, among other things, that the ideological hegemony of the people over the traditional aristocracy in fourth-century Athens was wider than is usually thought; it is reflected not only in the speeches of the active politicians, the orators, who needed the approval of the masses to win honour in the city, but also in the writings of a politically uninvolved philosopher, who had no clear, practical motivation for supporting democratic ideology. (shrink)

This book is best understood if one places it into the specific context of present-day debates about the shortcomings of American liberalism. With Alasdair MacIntyre and other communitarians on the one hand, and the "new constitutionalist right" on the other hand, mainstream liberalism in the United States reaching from Dewey to Rawls appears to be under pressure. Macedo does his best to salvage it without relying on support from left-wing communitarians or moderate defenders of social democracy such as Charles Taylor (...) or M. Walzer. The title "liberal virtues" is, after all, almost provocative; at least we begin to hear it that way, having become accustomed to separating virtue from liberalism and attributing an almost premodern meaning to the term virtue. Therefore Macedo puts much effort into a reconstruction of the historical ancestry of American liberalism and shows that liberalism was integral to the constitutional history of the United States. He takes his argument through a consideration of a number of relevant Supreme Court decisions, all the while clearly recognizing that republican and democratic virtues have sources other than those available through constitutional adjudication. What interests the author is the relation between the public virtues of reasonableness, tolerance, critical reflection as moral virtues and their legal counterparts. He thus makes a case for a liberal public morality or ethos, without which political liberalism or liberalism in constitutional law cannot overcome a "shortfall of legitimacy and moral justification". (shrink)

Enrique Dussel telah lama dikenal secara luas sebagai seorang filsuf dari Amerika Latin, yang memperkenalkan “filsafat pembebasan”. Buku Ethics of Liberation ini merupakan elaborasi gagasan sentralnya “pembebasan”. Dussel saat ini menjadi profesor filsafat di Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Iztapalapa dan di Universidad Nacional Autóma de México di Mexico City. Dalam karya ini ia mencoba mengatasi berbagai sistem etika yang berlatar belakang filsafat kontinental, yang ia sebut sebagai filsafat yang berbasis filsafat Yunani atau disebut juga “hellenosentrisme” atau “eropasentrisme. Filsafat dan sistem etika (...) ini tidak memadai lagi untuk mendorong pembebasan korban peminggiran oleh globalisasi dan kapitalisme neo-liberal. Dussel mengawali bukunya sepanjang 715 halaman ini dengan menyajikan uraian mengenai sistem etika dalam sejarah dunia, yang dipandang sebagai filsafat yang datang dari pinggiran, periferi. Dari sinilah Dussel mengembangkan etika dari perspektif korban yang tereksklusi. Pada Bagian I Dussel membahas “Fondasi Etika” (h. 53-186) yang terdiri dari tiga komponen. Pertama, etika material atau isi dari etika, yaitu reproduksi dan pengembangan kehidupan secara sadar. Dussel memulai uraiannya dengan pandangan antropologisnya, dimana digambarkan tingkat-tingkat kesatuan hidup manusia. Ia mengaitkan padangannya mengenai manusia dengan “neuroscience. Kemudian dibahas beberapa aliran dalam etikla material;, seperti utilitarianisme dan komunitarianisme (A. MacEntyre, Charles Tay;or, M. Walzer), konsep eudaimonis dari Aristoteles, Sittlichkeit dari Hegel, etika matrial dari Max Scheler, gagasan Xavier Zubiri.. Dari uraian yang sifatnya deskriptif itu, Dussel beranjak kepada perumusan universal, yang merupakan komponen kedua. Yang memberi pembenaran atas norma yang telah dirumuskan. Rumusan universal itu dicapai melalui suatu diskursus dari partisipan yang setara, dalam suatu komunitas komunikasi. Itulah syarat tercapainya kesahihan antarsubjektif. Yang dibahas Dussel adalah sistem etika Kant. John Rawls, Karel Otto-Apel dan J. Habermas. Tahap ketiga dibahas komponen kelayakan berhadapan dengan berbagai kendala.............. Buku Ethics of Liberation memuat uraian yang sangat kaya akan berbagai sistem etika, terutama sistem etika yang diajukan oleh berbagai filsuf kontemporer. Sistem itu tidak ditolak, tetapi harus dilengkap dengan sistem etika-kritis, yeng mendorong mereka yang menjadi korban untuk membebaskan diri. Untuk memperdalam analisisnya Dussel banyak mengacu kepada Marx, Sekolah Frankurt, Nietzsche dan Freud. Pandangan Freire mengenai dialog dan “raising consciousness” melengkap apa yang disebut “konsensus” dalam sistem etrika Habermasian. Dialog menjadi penting untuk membangun komunikasi dalam masyarakat yang asimetris. Ini diperkaya dengan pengalaman tumbuhnya kesadaran sebagaimana diuraikan oleh Rigoberto Menchú Sistem etika Emmanuel Levinas memberikan perspektif baru mengenai keharusan “pengakuan” (recognition) dan tanggung jawab terhadap yang lain. Buku Dussel ini akan memperkaya pandangan para dosen etika, yang pada umumnya terpaku pada sistem etika “Eropasentris.” (M. Sastrapratedja, Program Pascasarjana, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta). (shrink)