Abstract
AbstractThaddeus Metz, in his book “A Relational Moral Theory” compares the relational African view to Western theories of right action with a focus on Kant (respective contemporary Kantianism) and Utilitarianism. In focussing on the opposition between a relational and an individualistic view, Metz questions the interpretation of basic normative assumptions that are guiding central Western moral and political institutions. He particularly focusses on Kantian and Utilitarian approaches to which he ascribes substantive moral assumptions in terms of utility respective autonomy. In this paper, we reconstruct Metz’s position on the opposition between a relational and an individualistic view on ethics. We then investigate whether his relational conceptualisation is a convincing reconstruction of African views and question his take on Western positions, focussing in particular on views around individual rights and communality as presented in the Kantian tradition. We highlight the value of ubuntu in intercultural discourse to foster ethical and moral reasoning in a holistic way and conclude that any reflection on ethics necessarily involves an understanding of our common human nature, which is at the core of philosophical anthropology.
Funder
University of the Witwatersrand
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference54 articles.
1. Adams M (1997) Individualism, Moral Autonomy and the Language of Human rights. South Afr J Hum Rights 13(4):501–513
2. Andanda P (2006) The law and regulation of clinical research: interplay with public policy and bioethics. Focus, Nairobi
3. Andorno R (2009) Human dignity and human rights as a common ground for a global bioethics. J Med Philos 34(3):223–240
4. Baron MW, Pettit P, Slote M (1997) Three methods of ethics. Blackwell, London
5. Bell RH, Fernback J (2015) Understanding African philosophy: a cross-cultural approach to classical and contemporary issues. Routledge, London