Home
the Individual and Society: A Comparison Between Views of Enlightenment Those Nineteenth Century (Classic Reprint)
Barnes and Noble
Loading Inventory...
the Individual and Society: A Comparison Between Views of Enlightenment Those Nineteenth Century (Classic Reprint) in Franklin, TN
Current price: $26.25
Barnes and Noble
the Individual and Society: A Comparison Between Views of Enlightenment Those Nineteenth Century (Classic Reprint) in Franklin, TN
Current price: $26.25
Loading Inventory...
Size: Hardcover
Excerpt from The Individual and Society: A Comparison Between the Views of the Enlightenment and Those of the Nineteenth Century
It has not been thought necessary to refer to the ethical views Of either the ancient or mediaeval moralists, because for them there was no problem of alter and ego, at least not in the sense, in which the moralists Of the 18th and lgth centuries were confronted with it. To the ancient moralist man was a political animal; he was never thought of except as a part Of the state, indeed, it was that which gave him value and worth. The Greek could no more think Of an individual existing apart from society, than he could think of an arm existing apart from the body. Artistotle declared that one who is independent Of society is either a god or a beast; and he frequently employs the metaphor Of an Organism to illustrate the relation in which man stood to society,1 the family was regarded by him as the fundamental unit of all social life. For Plato, as for Aristotle, the social state was prior to the individual, and was necessary for the fullest development of his nature as a social being. It never occurred to the ancient moralist to think of the individual except as a member of a social state; nor do we find even the mediaeval thinker much concerned about the individual and society. It is not, indeed, until we come to the 18th century that we are seri ously confronted with the problem of ego and alter; with the coming of Hobbes, we are brought face to face with two very different views Of moral conduct.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
It has not been thought necessary to refer to the ethical views Of either the ancient or mediaeval moralists, because for them there was no problem of alter and ego, at least not in the sense, in which the moralists Of the 18th and lgth centuries were confronted with it. To the ancient moralist man was a political animal; he was never thought of except as a part Of the state, indeed, it was that which gave him value and worth. The Greek could no more think Of an individual existing apart from society, than he could think of an arm existing apart from the body. Artistotle declared that one who is independent Of society is either a god or a beast; and he frequently employs the metaphor Of an Organism to illustrate the relation in which man stood to society,1 the family was regarded by him as the fundamental unit of all social life. For Plato, as for Aristotle, the social state was prior to the individual, and was necessary for the fullest development of his nature as a social being. It never occurred to the ancient moralist to think of the individual except as a member of a social state; nor do we find even the mediaeval thinker much concerned about the individual and society. It is not, indeed, until we come to the 18th century that we are seri ously confronted with the problem of ego and alter; with the coming of Hobbes, we are brought face to face with two very different views Of moral conduct.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from The Individual and Society: A Comparison Between the Views of the Enlightenment and Those of the Nineteenth Century
It has not been thought necessary to refer to the ethical views Of either the ancient or mediaeval moralists, because for them there was no problem of alter and ego, at least not in the sense, in which the moralists Of the 18th and lgth centuries were confronted with it. To the ancient moralist man was a political animal; he was never thought of except as a part Of the state, indeed, it was that which gave him value and worth. The Greek could no more think Of an individual existing apart from society, than he could think of an arm existing apart from the body. Artistotle declared that one who is independent Of society is either a god or a beast; and he frequently employs the metaphor Of an Organism to illustrate the relation in which man stood to society,1 the family was regarded by him as the fundamental unit of all social life. For Plato, as for Aristotle, the social state was prior to the individual, and was necessary for the fullest development of his nature as a social being. It never occurred to the ancient moralist to think of the individual except as a member of a social state; nor do we find even the mediaeval thinker much concerned about the individual and society. It is not, indeed, until we come to the 18th century that we are seri ously confronted with the problem of ego and alter; with the coming of Hobbes, we are brought face to face with two very different views Of moral conduct.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
It has not been thought necessary to refer to the ethical views Of either the ancient or mediaeval moralists, because for them there was no problem of alter and ego, at least not in the sense, in which the moralists Of the 18th and lgth centuries were confronted with it. To the ancient moralist man was a political animal; he was never thought of except as a part Of the state, indeed, it was that which gave him value and worth. The Greek could no more think Of an individual existing apart from society, than he could think of an arm existing apart from the body. Artistotle declared that one who is independent Of society is either a god or a beast; and he frequently employs the metaphor Of an Organism to illustrate the relation in which man stood to society,1 the family was regarded by him as the fundamental unit of all social life. For Plato, as for Aristotle, the social state was prior to the individual, and was necessary for the fullest development of his nature as a social being. It never occurred to the ancient moralist to think of the individual except as a member of a social state; nor do we find even the mediaeval thinker much concerned about the individual and society. It is not, indeed, until we come to the 18th century that we are seri ously confronted with the problem of ego and alter; with the coming of Hobbes, we are brought face to face with two very different views Of moral conduct.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
You May Also Like
More About Barnes and Noble at CoolSprings Galleria
Barnes & Noble is the world’s largest retail bookseller and a leading retailer of content, digital media and educational products. Our Nook Digital business offers a lineup of NOOK® tablets and e-Readers and an expansive collection of digital reading content through the NOOK Store®. Barnes & Noble’s mission is to operate the best omni-channel specialty retail business in America, helping both our customers and booksellers reach their aspirations, while being a credit to the communities we serve.
1800 Galleria Blvd #1310, Franklin, TN 37067, United States
