Abstract

According to a wide-spread opinion, the history of moral philosophy is divided into two major parts. Whereas ancient ethics is concerned with agent-relative prudential volitions, modern ethics is based upon agent-neutral moral obligations. The article questions this opposition by indicating that the mainstream of ancient ethics should rather be characterized by its typical theory of action. This theory doesn’t rest on prudential rationality but on the idea that a rational agent has to follow a number of non-arbitrary principles which conduct his or her deliberating, choosing and acting. The model in question starts with an intellectualist concept of the will , and develops an account of human flourishing which is the basis of subtle further distinctions between relevant and incidental goods. Finally, it opens the possibility to bridge the gap between the issue of human flourishing and the Kantian concept of morality