“Cooperation” has distinct meanings in biological and moral contexts. In nature, “cooperation” is commonly equated with “altruism,” and involves an apparent fitness cost to the actor. In the moral context, it is often employed to describe the behaviour required by a particular subset of morality, namely that of distributive justice. The existence of cooperation in nature poses a difficulty for those who seek explain it in evolutionary terms. There is an analogous problem in normative moral theory of reconciling cooperative behaviour with rationality. The constraints imposed by natural selection in the former context and by rationality in the latter make explaining or justifying cooperation difficult. Insofar as the social contract tradition is concerned with articulating or justifying the terms of social cooperation, these two problems are united through the contract metaphor. I examine these two structurally similar problems through the lens of the social contract tradition. In the descriptive arena, I argue that cultural group selection provides the most plausible explanation of the emergence of altruistic behaviours in nature. In the normative context, I argue that David Gauthier’s argument for the rationality of adopting the disposition of constrained maximization provides a defensible route to reconciling morality with rationality. I draw two conclusions with respect to how these two enterprises are connected. First, I argue, contrary to many critics of an empirically informed ethics, that the descriptive and normative projects are very much dependent upon one another. Insofar as culture is required for a descriptive account of the emergence of cooperation, and to the extent that reasoning about which norms ought to govern our interactions plays a role in their transmission, our descriptive account not only leaves room for normative considerations, but in fact requires them. Second, I argue that there is a convergence in the outcomes of both the descriptive and normative projects. I show that the explanation of the existence of cooperation that I favor also provides us with an explanation of the emergence of dispositions that structurally resemble those that Gauthier defends as rational. And thus we arrive at an account that brings together rationality, evolution, and morality.

In this dissertation, I attempt to clarify the concept of odious debts and its relationship with global justice theory. Odious debts are debts that are not binding for the citizens of a country, as they were incurred by an illegitimate government in their name but were used for private purposes. I approach the problem of odious debts from two different perspectives. First, I explore the possible connections between odious debts and the contemporary debate on global justice. I argue that current debates on global justice have focused on the extremely important question of whether the international order is harmful or coercive, but have sometimes reached wrong conclusions about this issue. While some scholars have argued that the international order is not coercive at all, others have argued that it is, but did not find a persuasive way of making the point. Odious debts become relevant in this context, because they show a different way in which the global order could be said to be coercive. Second, I develop an account of odious debts from a moral point of view. I argue that a big portion of the debts of the poorest countries are not binding and therefore countries are morally entitled to repudiate them. An implication of this is that lenders have no moral right to demand repayment of odious debts. The reason why some debts are not binding is that citizens should only be held liable for debts incurred in their name when the money that is the basis of that debt is used for legitimate public purposes, not private ones. Whenever ruler acts in accordance to private purposes, states are no longer collectively responsible for the acts incurred in their name. This follows from a proper understanding of social contract theories but also, I argue, from a utilitarian perspective.

“Cooperation” has distinct meanings in biological and moral contexts. In nature, “cooperation” is commonly equated with “altruism,” and involves an apparent fitness cost to the actor. In the moral context, it is often employed to describe the behaviour required by a particular subset of morality, namely that of distributive justice. The existence of cooperation in nature poses a difficulty for those who seek explain it in evolutionary terms. There is an analogous problem in normative moral theory of reconciling cooperative behaviour with rationality. The constraints imposed by natural selection in the former context and by rationality in the latter make explaining or justifying cooperation difficult. Insofar as the social contract tradition is concerned with articulating or justifying the terms of social cooperation, these two problems are united through the contract metaphor. I examine these two structurally similar problems through the lens of the social contract tradition. In the descriptive arena, I argue that cultural group selection provides the most plausible explanation of the emergence of altruistic behaviours in nature. In the normative context, I argue that David Gauthier’s argument for the rationality of adopting the disposition of constrained maximization provides a defensible route to reconciling morality with rationality. I draw two conclusions with respect to how these two enterprises are connected. First, I argue, contrary to many critics of an empirically informed ethics, that the descriptive and normative projects are very much dependent upon one another. Insofar as culture is required for a descriptive account of the emergence of cooperation, and to the extent that reasoning about which norms ought to govern our interactions plays a role in their transmission, our descriptive account not only leaves room for normative considerations, but in fact requires them. Second, I argue that there is a convergence in the outcomes of both the descriptive and normative projects. I show that the explanation of the existence of cooperation that I favor also provides us with an explanation of the emergence of dispositions that structurally resemble those that Gauthier defends as rational. And thus we arrive at an account that brings together rationality, evolution, and morality.

This dissertation is a study of the relation between Aristotle’s ethics and the crafts (or technai). My thesis is that Aristotle’s argument is at key points shaped by models proper to the crafts, this shaping being deeper than is generally acknowledged, and philosophically more problematic. Despite this, I conclude that the arguments I examine can, if revised, be upheld. The plan of the dissertation is as follows – Preface: The relation of my study to the extant secondary literature; Introduction: The pre-Platonic concept of technē, as evidenced in Greek philosophical and literary sources, in particular the early Hippocratic corpus; Chapter one: The Platonic concept of technē, followed by an investigation of whether Plato affirms a virtue-technē in the Protagoras and Republic; Chapter two: Aristotle’s concept of technē, followed by scrutiny of his arguments in NE VI.5 against a virtue-technē, and of his analyses of slavery and deliberation; Chapter three: An exposition of Aristotle’s function argument, followed by a dominantist interpretation of it, and an explanation of dominantism as in part a technē-influenced doctrine; Chapter four: An examination of Aristotle’s ethical mean and its problems, with a diagnosis of these in terms of influence by the Philebus, and by paradigms derived from the crafts; Chapter five: Argument that Aristotle’s theory of habituation suffers from two significant opacities, these being a function of influence both by the Republic, and by models of craft-learning; Conclusion: Response to key objection; Aristotle’s ethics revised, defended.

The dissertation begins by discussing recent critical treatments of Nietzsche in the work of Alasdair MacIntyre and Jürgen Habermas, then gives a brief discussion of the broader scholarly reception of Nietzsche’s political thought. The body of the dissertation proceeds through the text of the Second Essay of Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals, trying to explicate his account of the origin of political society. The dissertation attempts in the first place to show that the historical narrative Nietzsche offers in the Second Essay is coherent, then to illuminate the details of his account of the rise of political society, and thus of civilized morality (what Nietzsche calls “the bad conscience”), and finally to detail the different stages in the development of the bad conscience. The dissertation lays particular emphasis on determining the relation between what Nietzsche calls ressentiment and the bad conscience. The dissertation also attempts to shed light on Nietzsche’s view of the relation between nature and political society and morality, as he expresses it both in his analysis of the bad conscience and in the somewhat more thematic discussion of this question at the beginning of the Essay.

The work of one of Islam’s most celebrated philosophers, Mulla Sadra Shirazi(d. 1045/1635 or 1050/1640), is characterized by a unique synthesis of the main strands of Islamic thought. Yet Sadra’s role as a philosopher was not simply to synthesize. His penetrating intellect and ability to cast new light on some of the fundamental problems of Islamic thought ensured that all of his books would be landmarks of intellectual achievement in their own right. Amongst his most significant but seriously neglected writings are his compositions on the Qur’an and its sciences. Broadly speaking, the present study investigates the manner in which scriptural exegesis, philosophy, and mysticism came together in Sadra’s writings on the Qur’an. More specifically, this study aims to examine the sophistication of the discussions to be found in Sadra’s Qur’anic works by focusing on his last complete and most mature tafsir, the Tafsir Surat al-fatiha. After surveying the history, reception, and content of Sadra’s writings on the Qur’an and presenting a coherent picture of the theoretical dimensions of his scriptural hermeneutics, we will go on to examine the Tafsir Surat al-fatiha’s structure and sources. This will set the stage for a careful analysis of the problems in cosmology, metaphysics, anthropology, theology, and soteriology addressed by Sadra in the work. Not only will our study demonstrate the manner in which Sadra reads scripture, but it will also afford us a window into the development of his religious thought, since the Fatiha provides him with the opportunity to recast many of his philosophical concerns within the Qur’an’s universe of discourse.

I argue that virginity is a distinct phenomenon with essential structures that can be apprehended and described using a phenomenological method, and thus offer the first robust phenomenology of virginity. A more complex passage than the physical transaction of first sexual intercourse, virginity manifests the event of a coming to love through the conduit of the sexual-erotic body. Calling on Jean-Luc Marion’s phenomenology of givenness, I argue that virginity qualifies as a saturated phenomenon, exceeding or overflowing intuition and signification in its paradoxical phenomenality. As a study in saturated phenomena my work pushes the limits of phenomenology by endorsing the exigency of a phenomenology of the evanescent and enigmatic to engage denigrated domains of human experience such as sex and love. Our access to virginity is possible because of our ontological constitution as sexuate beings, but also because of our essential potential to cultivate our sexuate existence through the lens of a primordial erotic attunement. Conscious development of our erotic potential is a form of ascesis that can elevate the sexual-erotic encounter to the ethical height of love. Still, virginity can never be forced, taken, or lost, since the phenomenon is ultimately only gifted through an act of erotic generosity and the intervention of grace. Virginity is not a one-time threshold crossing. It has the essential possibility of being perpetually renewed with each singular sexual-erotic encounter. I seek to sever sex from its legacy as mere animal instinct and from its functional and reproductive teleology in order to open a new way of thinking about our sexual-erotic being that focuses on its ethical potential and its usefulness as a model for being with others outside of the sexual-erotic relation. I take seriously the Irigarayan possibility that we can craft an ethics of Eros. My work draws broadly from twentieth-century literature on phenomenology, poststructuralism, and psychoanalysis, including that of Marion, Beauvoir, Irigaray, Derrida, Heidegger, Foucault, and Butler.

In this dissertation, I attempt to clarify the concept of odious debts and its relationship with global justice theory. Odious debts are debts that are not binding for the citizens of a country, as they were incurred by an illegitimate government in their name but were used for private purposes. I approach the problem of odious debts from two different perspectives. First, I explore the possible connections between odious debts and the contemporary debate on global justice. I argue that current debates on global justice have focused on the extremely important question of whether the international order is harmful or coercive, but have sometimes reached wrong conclusions about this issue. While some scholars have argued that the international order is not coercive at all, others have argued that it is, but did not find a persuasive way of making the point. Odious debts become relevant in this context, because they show a different way in which the global order could be said to be coercive. Second, I develop an account of odious debts from a moral point of view. I argue that a big portion of the debts of the poorest countries are not binding and therefore countries are morally entitled to repudiate them. An implication of this is that lenders have no moral right to demand repayment of odious debts. The reason why some debts are not binding is that citizens should only be held liable for debts incurred in their name when the money that is the basis of that debt is used for legitimate public purposes, not private ones. Whenever ruler acts in accordance to private purposes, states are no longer collectively responsible for the acts incurred in their name. This follows from a proper understanding of social contract theories but also, I argue, from a utilitarian perspective.

The following dissertation is a philosophical exploration of the cosmology of the Zhuangzi, arguing it is meontological due to the prominence afforded the Chinese word wu 無, rendered as both nothingness and nonbeing. It puts forth the argument that the Zhuangzi’s cosmology creates a relationship whereby nonbeing and being are intertwined under the purview of Dao 道. As a result, the text’s axiology is unique in that it states cosmological freedom is attainable via uniting with primal nothingness. Chapter one seeks to disprove the notion that nonbeing cannot be anything but a transcendental other by arguing that Dao is a negatively creative source that simultaneously gives birth to nonbeing and being, making it impossible for nonbeing to be nihilistic or seen as an absolute void. Chapter two delves into the manifestation of things and how the sage, as an epitome of the naturalness of Dao, follows the becoming and returning of things to the One, darkening himself in nothingness in order to cultivate his life. Chapter three poses the question of whether or not the ontological movement of things is temporal and how temporality can even be possible considering the meontological nature of the universe. The next two chapters focus on the arts of useful uselessness and forgetting, the two principal means by which the sage achieves harmony with the oneness of things. Chapter six concludes by arguing that freedom attained by perfecting the arts of uselessness and forgetfulness is not rooted in ethical virtue but is the pinnacle of one’s cosmological relationship with Dao and is embodied in the act of carefree wandering. Zhuangzi’s cosmology is thus rooted in the life force of nothingness and doing away with ontic distinctions so as to return to natural equanimity and stillness of spirit.

The following dissertation is a philosophical exploration of the cosmology of the Zhuangzi, arguing it is meontological due to the prominence afforded the Chinese word wu 無, rendered as both nothingness and nonbeing. It puts forth the argument that the Zhuangzi’s cosmology creates a relationship whereby nonbeing and being are intertwined under the purview of Dao 道. As a result, the text’s axiology is unique in that it states cosmological freedom is attainable via uniting with primal nothingness. Chapter one seeks to disprove the notion that nonbeing cannot be anything but a transcendental other by arguing that Dao is a negatively creative source that simultaneously gives birth to nonbeing and being, making it impossible for nonbeing to be nihilistic or seen as an absolute void. Chapter two delves into the manifestation of things and how the sage, as an epitome of the naturalness of Dao, follows the becoming and returning of things to the One, darkening himself in nothingness in order to cultivate his life. Chapter three poses the question of whether or not the ontological movement of things is temporal and how temporality can even be possible considering the meontological nature of the universe. The next two chapters focus on the arts of useful uselessness and forgetting, the two principal means by which the sage achieves harmony with the oneness of things. Chapter six concludes by arguing that freedom attained by perfecting the arts of uselessness and forgetfulness is not rooted in ethical virtue but is the pinnacle of one’s cosmological relationship with Dao and is embodied in the act of carefree wandering. Zhuangzi’s cosmology is thus rooted in the life force of nothingness and doing away with ontic distinctions so as to return to natural equanimity and stillness of spirit.