[pt] Esta tese tem como objetivo recuperar um enfoque ético sobre o bem (comum), porém dentro dos contextos sociais e eclesiais contemporâneos. David Hollenbach é o autor estudado neste trabalho, especialmente porque ele tenta responder a questões importantes como o papel da religião na vida pública, o conceito tradicional de tolerância e individualismo em uma sociedade pluralista e outros problemas contemporâneos sobre relacionamento em comunidade. Este estudo é estruturado em três capítulos. O primeiro capítulo é uma análise da situação atual, caracterizada pelo pluralismo, o individualismo e a tolerância, cuja abordagem é ineficaz para lidar com a pobreza urbana nos Estados Unidos. O segundo capítulo estabelece um quadro teórico para o bem comum, com base em bens sociais, o papel público da religião, as contribuições teológicas de Agostinho e Tomás de Aquino, e da solidariedade intelectual. O último capítulo é uma leitura de questões práticas à luz da teoria do bem comum. A reafirmação da antiga tradição do bem comum, um valioso conceito para o pensamento social cristão, de tal forma que contribua para lidar com as divisões sociais da vida urbana contemporânea e da sociedade global é o principal objetivo. Hollenbach baseia-se em análise social, filosofia moral e ética teológica para traçar rnovos rumos que possibilitem a consecução do bem comum para todos os americanos. Os problemas de divisão entre a classe média e os pobres nas grandes cidades e outros desafios exigem um novo compromisso com o bem comum. A tolerância não é parâmetro para pautar este tipo de relacionamento. Ademais, o individualismo, profundamente arraigado na cultura americana, dificulta a consecução do bem comum. Para tanto, a leitura de Tomás de Aquino e Agostinho, na ética cristã de Hollenbach, convoca crentes e não crentes para se moverem em direção a novas formas de solidariedade, caso queiram viver juntos uma vida boa. Uma ressignificação teórica do bem comum permite fazer contribuições práticas às mais variadas abordagens de ordem política, social, cultural, religiosa em sua dinâmica de desenvolvimento. / [en] This thesis aims to retrieve an ethical focus on the (common) good, but within the contemporary social and ecclesial contexts. David Hollenbach is a leading author in this field, especially because he attempts to answer important questions like the role of religion in public life, the traditional concept of tolerance and individualism in a pluralistic society, and other contemporary problems with relationships in a community. This study is structured into three chapters. The first one is an examination of the current situation characterized by pluralism, individualism, and tolerance, of which approach have not effectively addressed urban poverty in the United States. The second chapter establishes a theoretical framework for the common good based on social goods, public role of religion, theological contributions from Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, and intellectual solidarity. The final chapter is a reading of practical issues based on the common good theory. A restatement of the ancient tradition of the common good, a valuable concept to the Catholic social teaching, in a way that addresses contemporary social divisions in urban life and global society is the main objective of this thesis. Hollenbach draws on social analysis, moral philosophy, and theological ethics to chart new directions to bring the common good closer to all Americans. The problems of division between the middle class and the poor in major cities and other contemporary challenges require a new commitment to the common good. Tolerance is not the best reason to base this type of relationship. Moreover, individualism, deeply rooted in American culture, hinders the achievement of the common good. In order to achieve this, a reading of Thomas Aquinas and Augustine, in Hollenbach’s Christian ethics, calls both, believers and secular people, to move toward new forms of solidarity, if they wish to live a good life together. A theoretical reframing of the common good allows someone to make practical contributions to the various approaches of politics, society, culture, and religion in its developmental momentum.

The purpose of this study is to seek to an answer to the question of what constitutes a tenable model for global ethics. This is done in part by a critical engagement with four different models of global ethics; two proposals from political philosophy and two contributions from theological ethics. The models analyzed in the study are: (1) the capabilities approach as developed by Martha Nussbaum, (2) Seyla Benhabib’s discourse ethics and model of cosmopolitan federalism, (3) David Hollenbach’s model of the common good and human rights, and (4) the model for responsibility ethics and theological humanism as developed by William Schweiker. These models contain different understandings of global justice, human rights, and sustainable development. The study works with six primary problems: (1) Which are the main moral problems associated with different processes of globalization? (2) What should be the response to these problems, in the form of a normative ethical model? (3) What is the relation between global ethics and universalism? (4) What kind of institutional vision for the international arena does a tenable global ethic promote? (5) Given the human diversity and global pluralism, what would be a reasonable view of the human being included in a global ethic? (6) What kind of ethical theory is sustainable for global ethical reflection? These questions also form the basis for the analysis of the models. The study uses a set of criteria in order to assess the answers that the models offer for these questions. These criteria also constitute the framework within which the author’s contribution to the discussion of global ethics is phrased. The criteria are founded on an idea of what characterizes global ethical reflection. The contention is that a tenable global ethic should be relevant, and it should also be related to a reasonable view of human beings and a plausible ethical theory. Together these support the criterion of communicability, which argues that a global ethic should above all be communicable, i.e. capable of enabling cross-cultural communication. A central argument which this study makes is that a kind of ethical contextualism is more reasonable than an epistemological universalism.