>Nussbaum believes philosphers should be "lawyers for humanity." One could
>say she has a legalistic, Rawlsian-liberal take on things that plays down
>popular movements and wider economic forces.
Peter, this was my impression too after reading the New Republic piece.
"Butler is like the Pied
>Piper leading all the children away!" she told me.
Yes, a modern day sophist, she seems to be saying. And pretty insulting to equate people in their 20s with children. Sure, there are pressures given the mcdonaldization of the university--esp on those without an aristocratic inheritance--to get some kind of theory quick and easy. But to think graduate students are not aware of the pressures on them--and the compromises it leads to--is pretty insulting. Oh well.
"For her, philosophy is nothing less
>than an intellectual tool for the improvement of mankind."
>[clip]
Please. I share your impression of the limits of her New Republic review. At any rate, the whole ethico philosophical critique of welfare economics on the face of it seems to me not that interesting. But I haven't read Nussbaum or Sen on this.
Yours, Rakesh