Modern economic theory of self-interest alleges that in their economic relations people always behave in a way that maximises their utility. The idea whether human beings were solely self-interested has a long history as it can be seen from the writings of Greek philosophers and the Church fathers. Among Greek philosophers there were those who argued that human beings were naturally self-interested (Aristotle) and those who maintained that human beings were communal by nature (Plato, Stoics and the Pythagoreans). The later position was adopted by the Church fathers as they condemned self-interest as the sin of avarice and greed. The justification of self-interest in human and political activities was part and parcel of the economic and political early modernists, as it can be seen in the works of Mandeville, Hobbes, Hume and Adam Smith. In the writings of these thinkers, the flourishing of wealth depended on individual freedom to pursue their self-interests. In this regard, selfinterest became the sole source of motivation in the behaviour of homo economicus. A persistent motif in late modern economic discourse on self-interest is based on the idea that people think and act on the basis of that which is to their self-interest. It is mainly for this reason that late modern economic thinkers maintain that society would prosper when people are left alone to pursue their self-interests. Late modern economic theory of utility maximisation alleges that individuals act only after calculating costs and benefits. The argument of this thesis, based on the commonalities between African humanism and process philosophical anthropology, is that self-interest is antithetical to communal life as advocated in the ethic of Ubuntu. One who acts solely on the basis of maximising his or her utility would inevitably deprive others of a humane existence. A holistic metaphysical outlook based on the relatedness and interrelatedness of everything that exists as we find it in African humanism and process philosophical anthropology implies that the individual exists in internal relations with everything else. We should go beyond selfinterest by giving primacy to a holistic ethic. / Systematic Theology & Theological Ethics / D. Div. (Theological Ethics)

Depuis sa création en 1838, le mouvement New Thought poursuit son chemin à la tête de la mouvance religieuse métaphysique aux Etats-Unis. Considéré comme un croisement d’idées politiques et religieuses, le mouvement constitue un élément incontournable de la construction de l’identité américaine. Se présentant comme un métissage de théologies occidentales et orientales, ce mouvement thérapeutique s’impose comme un phénomène culturel pertinent dans l’étude du champ religieux. Evoluant de la substantialité vers le procès, le mouvement s’est engagé tout récemment vers une transformation idéologique, à la recherche d’un renouveau spirituel et d’une ré-activation de son pluralisme religieux et de son dynamisme sous la forme du Process New Thought. / Since its creation in 1838, the New Thought Movement has led the metaphysical religious movement in America. It is a landmark in the construction of the American identity since it has always been at the crossroads of spiritual and political ideas. As a blend of Western and Eastern theologies, this therapeutic movement stands out as a cultural landmark in religious studies. Moving from Substance New Thought to Process New Thought, it has recently engaged in an ideological transformation leading to both a spiritual renewal and a re-activation of its dynamic religious pluralism.

Modern economic theory of self-interest alleges that in their economic relations people always behave in a way that maximises their utility. The idea whether human beings were solely self-interested has a long history as it can be seen from the writings of Greek philosophers and the Church fathers. Among Greek philosophers there were those who argued that human beings were naturally self-interested (Aristotle) and those who maintained that human beings were communal by nature (Plato, Stoics and the Pythagoreans). The later position was adopted by the Church fathers as they condemned self-interest as the sin of avarice and greed. The justification of self-interest in human and political activities was part and parcel of the economic and political early modernists, as it can be seen in the works of Mandeville, Hobbes, Hume and Adam Smith. In the writings of these thinkers, the flourishing of wealth depended on individual freedom to pursue their self-interests. In this regard, selfinterest became the sole source of motivation in the behaviour of homo economicus. A persistent motif in late modern economic discourse on self-interest is based on the idea that people think and act on the basis of that which is to their self-interest. It is mainly for this reason that late modern economic thinkers maintain that society would prosper when people are left alone to pursue their self-interests. Late modern economic theory of utility maximisation alleges that individuals act only after calculating costs and benefits. The argument of this thesis, based on the commonalities between African humanism and process philosophical anthropology, is that self-interest is antithetical to communal life as advocated in the ethic of Ubuntu. One who acts solely on the basis of maximising his or her utility would inevitably deprive others of a humane existence. A holistic metaphysical outlook based on the relatedness and interrelatedness of everything that exists as we find it in African humanism and process philosophical anthropology implies that the individual exists in internal relations with everything else. We should go beyond selfinterest by giving primacy to a holistic ethic. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / D. Div. (Theological Ethics)