Self-love and self-liking in the moral and political philosophy of Bernard Mandeville and David Hume

This work offers a novel interpretation of David Hume’s (1711–1776) conception of the conjectural development of civil society and artificial moral institutions. It focuses on the social elements of Hume’s Treatise of human nature (1739–40) and the necessary connection between science of man and politeness, civilised monarchies, social distance and hierarchical structure of civil society. The study incorporates aspects of intellectual history, history of philosophy and book history. In order to understand David Hume’s thinking, the intellectual development of Bernard Mandeville (1670–1733) needs to be accounted for. When put into a historical perspective, the moral, political and social components of Treatise of human nature can be read in the context of a philosophical tradition, in which Mandeville plays a pivotal role. A distinctive character of Mandeville and Hume’s account of human nature and moral institutions was the introduction of a simple distinction between self-love and self-liking. The symmetric passions of self-interest and pride can only be controlled by the corresponding moral institutions. This is also the way in which we can say that moral institutions are drawn from human nature. In the case of self-love or self-interest, the corresponding moral institution is justice. Respectively, concerning self-liking or pride the moral institution is politeness. There is an explicit analogy between these moral institutions. If we do not understand this analogy, we do not understand the nature of either justice or politeness. The present work is divided into two parts. In the first part, ‘Intellectual development of Bernard Mandeville’, it is argued that the relevance of the paradigmatic change in Mandeville’s thinking has been missed. It draws a picture of Mandeville turning from the Hobbism of The Fable of the Bees to an original theory of civil society put forward in his later works. In order to make this change more apparent, Mandeville’s career and the publishing history of The Fable of the Bees are examined comprehensively. This interpretation, based partly on previously unknown sources, challenges F. B. Kaye’s influential decision to publish the two parts of The Fable of the Bees as a uniform work of two volumes. The main relevance, however, of the ‘Intellectual development of Mandeville’ is to function as the context for the young Hume. The second part of the work, ‘David Hume and Greatness of mind’, explores in philosophical detail the social theory of the Treatise and politics and the science of man in his Essays. This part will also reveal the relevance of Greatness of mind as a general concept for David Hume’s moral and political philosophy.

The Home of Hearing : George Lindbeck's understanding of community

The aim of this thesis was to examine the understanding of community in George Lindbeck s The Nature of Doctrine. Intrinsic to this question was also examining how Lindbeck understands the relation between the text and the world which both meet in a Christian community. Thirdly this study also aimed at understanding what the persuasiveness of this understanding depends on. The method applied for this task was systematic analysis. The study was conducted by first providing an orientation into the nontheological substance of the ND which was assumed useful with respect to the aim of this study. The study then went on to explore Lindbeck in his own context of postliberal theology in order to see how the ND was received. It also attempted to provide a picture of how the ND relates to Lindbeck as a theologian. The third chapter was a descriptive analysis into the cultural-linguistic perspective, which is understood as being directly proportional to his understanding of community. The fourth chapter was an analysis into how the cultural-linguistic perspective sees the relation between the text and the world. When religion is understood from a cultural-linguistic perspective, it presents itself as a cultural-linguistic entity, which Lindbeck understands as a comprehensive interpretive scheme which structures human experience and understanding of oneself and the world in which one lives. When one exists in this entity, it is the entity which shapes the subjectivities of all those who are at home in this entity which makes participation in the life of a cultural linguistic entity a condition for understanding it. Religion is above all an external word that moulds and shapes our religious existence and experience. Understanding faith then as coming from hearing, is something that correlates with the cultural-linguistic depiction of reality. Religion informs us of a religious reality, it does not originate in any way from ourselves. This externality linked to the axiomatic nature of religion is also something that distinguishes Lindbeck sharply from liberalist tendencies, which understand religion as ultimately expressing the prereflective depths of the inner self. Language is the central analogy to understanding the medium in which one moves when inhabiting a cultural-linguistic system because language is the transmitting medium in which the cultural-linguistic system is embodied. The realism entailed in Lindbeck s understanding of a community is that we are fundamentally on the receiving end when it comes to our identities whether cultural or religious. We always witness to something. Its persuasiveness rests on the fact that we never exist in an unpersuaded reality. The language of Christ is a self-sustaining and irreducible cultural-linguistic entity, which is ontologically founded upon Christ. It transmits the reality of a new being. The basic relation to the world for a Christian is that of witnessing salvation in Christ: witnessing Christ as the home of hearing the message of salvation, which is the God-willed way. Following this logic, the relation of the world and the text is one of relating to the world from the text, i.e. In Christ through the word (text) for the world, because it assumes it s logic from the way Christ ontologically relates to us.