Virtue In An Age Of Identity Politics

Virtue in an Age of Identity Politics: A Stoic Approach to Social Justice proffers Stoicism as a more constructive approach to social justice activism than Critical Social Justice, the current core framework for social justice activism in the 21st-century. Critical Social Justice examines ideologies that underlie the stratification of society in ways that confer ongoing benefits to some groups at the expense of other groups and aims for a radical reshaping of prevailing institutions because they purportedly, and irredeemably, underlie a set of norms, beliefs, and attitudes which will continue to perpetuate social inequalities if we do not undertake efforts to rethink, disrupt, and restructure society. Stoicism, the ancient Greek and Roman philosophy, is chosen specifically to help navigate the contentious discourse on “systemic” power and privilege which dominates the Critical Social Justice paradigm. In emphasizing intent over impact, as well as the distinction between the circumstances of our lives and the living of our lives, the Stoic approach highlights the vital importance of reason and virtue in achieving a connection between the individualistic concern with cultivation of a good character and the collective concern with making the world a better place.

From public intellectual and professor Robert Boyers, “a powerfully persuasive, insightful, and provocative prose that mixes erudition and first-hand reportage” (Joyce Carol Oates) addressing recent developments in American culture and arguing for the tolerance of difference that is at the heart of the liberal tradition. Written from the perspective of a liberal intellectual who has spent a lifetime as a writer, editor, and college professor, The Tyranny of Virtue is a “courageous, unsparing, and nuanced to a rare degree” (Mary Gaitskill) insider’s look at shifts in American culture—most especially in the American academy—that so many people find alarming. Part memoir and part polemic, Boyers’s collection of essays laments the erosion of standard liberal values, and covers such subjects as tolerance, identity, privilege, appropriation, diversity, and ableism that have turned academic life into a minefield. Why, Robert Boyers asks, are a great many liberals, people who should know better, invested in the drawing up of enemies lists and driven by the conviction that on critical issues no dispute may be tolerated? In stories, anecdotes, and character profiles, a public intellectual and longtime professor takes on those in his own progressive cohort who labor in the grip of a poisonous and illiberal fundamentalism. The end result is a finely tuned work of cultural intervention from the front lines.

This book examines the conception of the person at work in John Rawls’s writings from Theory of Justice to Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. The book aims to show that objections to Rawls’s political conception of the person fail and that a Rawlsian conception of political identity is defensible. The book shows that the debate between liberals and communitarians is relevant to the current debate regarding perfectionism and neutrality in politics, and clarifies the debate between Rawls and communitarians in a way that will promote fruitful discussion on the issue of political identity. It does this by providing a clearer account of a conception of personal identity according to which persons are socially constituted, including the intuitions and assumptions underlying the communitarians’ conception of persons as “socially constituted.” It examines the communitarian objections to liberal political theory and to the liberal conception of persons, the “unencumbered self.” The book differentiates between two types of objection to the liberal conception of persons: the metaphysical and normative. It explains Rawls's political conception of persons, and the metaphysical and normative commitments Rawls incurs—and does not incur—in virtue of that conception. It shows that both kind of objection to Rawls's political conception of the person fail. Finally, modifying Rawls’s political conception of the person, a Rawlsian conception of political identity is explained and defended.

The practice of psychiatric care for those with severe mental disorders is the focus of this interdisciplinary work by a philosopher and a clinician. In elucidating the moral psychology and character called for by that setting, The Virtuous Psychiatrist offers a sustained application of virtue theory to the particular practice of psychiatry.

At a moment in which interest in political theology is rising, acceptance of a public role for religion is declining, and cynicism regarding both political and religious institutions is overflowing, this book investigates the possibilities and constraints of a Christian political theology that can meaningfully mediate Scripture, doctrine, and political reality. In critical dialogue with political theologians and political philosophers past and present, we explore the origins, meaning, and purpose of Christian political theology in an age of growing discontent with the once-impregnable liberal democratic order of yesteryear. Approaching politics as both art and science, this book lays a challenge at the feet of political theologians to offer a theological account of politics that is genuinely illuminating of political reality and efficacious for the faithful who seek to operate within it.

America has always been committed to the idea that citizens can work together to build a common world. Today, three afflictions keep us from pursuing that noble ideal. The first and most obvious affliction is identity politics, which seeks to transform America by turning politics into a religious venue of sacrificial offering. For now, the sacrificial scapegoat is the white, heterosexual, man. After he is humiliated and purged, who will be the object of cathartic rage? White women? Black men? Identity politics is the anti-egalitarian spiritual eugenics of our age. It demands that pure and innocent groups ascend, and the stained transgressor groups be purged. The second affliction is that citizens oscillate back and forth, in bipolar fashion, at one moment feeling invincible on their social media platforms and, the next, feeling impotent to face the everyday problems of life without the guidance of experts and global managers. Third, Americans are afflicted by a disease that cannot quite be named, characterized by an addictive hope that they can find cheap shortcuts that bypass the difficult labors of everyday life. Instead of real friendship, we seek social media “friends.” Instead of meals at home, we order “fast food.” Instead of real shopping, we “shop” online. Instead of counting on our families and neighbors to address our problems, we look to the state to take care of us. In its many forms, this disease promises release from our labors, yet impoverishes us all. American Awakening chronicles all of these problems, yet gives us hope for the future.

A Marriage Made in Hell Where did they come from, these furiously self-righteous “social justice warriors”? The growing radicalism and intolerance on the American left is the result of the strange union of Nietzsche’s “will to power” and a secularized Puritan moralism. In this penetrating study, Mark T. Mitchell explains how this marriage made in hell gave birth to a powerful and destructive political and social movement. Having declared that “God is dead,” Friedrich Nietzsche identified the “will to power” as the fundamental force of human life. There is no good or evil in a Nietzschean world—only the interests of the strong. Reason and the common good have no place there. The Puritan, by contrast, is morally rigorous, zealous to promote virtue and punish vice. America’s Puritan tradition, now thoroughly de-Christianized, has been reduced to a self-righteous moral absolutism that focuses on the faults of others, intent on avenging the sins of society, institutions, and the past in pursuit of the secularized ideals of equality, diversity, and social justice. As Nietzsche’s ideas have permeated our culture, a new generation of radicals has embraced the rhetoric and tactics of the will to power. But the strength of America’s residual Puritanism keeps them only half-baked Nietzscheans. More Christian than they care to admit, they cling to a moralism that Nietzsche would despise. The incoherence of their mixed creed dooms social justice warriors to perpetual frustration. Their identity politics generates ever more radical demands that can never be satisfied, further fracturing a society in desperate need of a unifying myth. We seem to be left with only two options, Mitchell concludes—Nietzsche or Christ, the will to power or the will to truth. The choice is bracingly simple.

What is the good life? Posing this question today would likely elicit very different answers. Some might say that the good life means doing good - improving one's community and the lives of others. Others might respond that it means doing well - cultivating one's own abilities in a meaningful way. But for Aristotle these two distinct ideas - doi...