Is there a distinction between public and private morality? Where would one draw the line? How does one define one over the other?
My question comes after reading a recent blog post by Bill Vallicella (
Maverick Philosopher: Machiavelli, Arendt, and Virtues Private and Public) in which he notes the need for those Machivellian types in order for a space to be created for private and "womanish" virtues. It reminds me of Michael Novak's defense of Nietzschean will-to-power because it creates a space for the nuns and priests to practice the private virtues of the faith.
I don't think there is a distinction proper, at least for the Christian, and I think imposing this distinction defeats the purpose of a Christian ethic. And, I think Bill butchers and misreads the "morality" sections in the Sermon on the Mount.
What do you all think?
__________________
Hello! Come visit my blog!
http://taylormweaver.wordpress.com/
Yes... I am the official "Knight Who Will Write Something On Derrida".
Bask in the wonderful glory.
"outside of a dog a book is a man's best friend... inside a dog it is too dark to read."
-groucho marx
Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon_Hunter Taylor, you just got drive-by theologied. |