Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Aztec moral philosophy didn't expect anyone to be a saint

#1
C C Offline
https://aeon.co/essays/aztec-moral-philo...be-a-saint

EXCERPT: . . . When I speak about the Aztecs – the people dominant in large parts of central America prior to the 16th-century Spanish conquest – even professional philosophers are often surprised to learn that the Aztecs were a philosophical culture. They’re even more startled to hear that we have (many volumes of) their texts recorded in their native language, Nahuatl. While a few of the pre-colonial hieroglyphic-type books survived the Spanish bonfires, our main sources of knowledge derive from records made by Catholic priests, up to the early 17th century. Using the Latin alphabet, these texts record the statements of tlamatinime, the indigenous philosophers, on matters as diverse as bird-flight patterns, moral virtue, and the structure of the cosmos. [...]

While Plato and Aristotle were concerned with character-centred virtue ethics, the Aztec approach is perhaps better described as socially-centred virtue ethics. If the Aztecs were right, then ‘Western’ philosophers have been too focused on individuals, too reliant on assessments of character, and too optimistic about the individual’s ability to correct her own vices. Instead, according to the Aztecs, we should look around to our family and friends, as well as our ordinary rituals or routines, if we hope to lead a better, more worthwhile existence.

This distinction bears on an important question: just how bad are good people allowed to be? Must good people be moral saints, or can ordinary folk be good if we have the right kind of support? This matters for fallible creatures, like me, who try to be good but often run into problems. Yet it also matters for questions of inclusivity. If being good requires exceptional traits, such as practical intelligence, then many people would be excluded – such as those with cognitive disabilities. That does not seem right. One of the advantages of the Aztec view, then, is that it avoids this outcome by casting virtue as a cooperative, rather than an individual, endeavour.

At its core, Aztec virtue ethics has three main elements. One is a conception of the good life as the ‘rooted’ or worthwhile life. Second is the idea of right action as the mean or middle way. Third and final is the belief that virtue is a quality that’s fostered socially...

MORE: https://aeon.co/essays/aztec-moral-philo...be-a-saint
Reply
#2
Syne Offline
And where has Greek/enlightenment philosophy gotten us compared to South American philosophy? Nuff said.
Where has collectivism gotten Venezuela?
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Bayesianism + Philosophy of space and time + Intro to philosophy of race C C 0 77 Aug 7, 2022 03:45 PM
Last Post: C C
  Religion vs Philosophy in 3 Minutes + Philosophy of Science with Hilary Putnam C C 2 621 Oct 16, 2019 05:26 PM
Last Post: C C
  Bring back science & philosophy as natural philosophy C C 0 494 May 15, 2019 02:21 AM
Last Post: C C
  Simone Weil: patron saint of anomalous indviduality, against political parties C C 0 318 Nov 11, 2018 12:17 AM
Last Post: C C
  The return of Aristotelian views in philosophy & philosophy of science: Goodbye Hume? C C 1 670 Aug 17, 2018 02:01 PM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  How Philippa Foot set her mind against prevailing moral philosophy C C 1 401 Dec 6, 2017 04:07 AM
Last Post: Syne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)